Connect with us

Opinion & Analysis

How Golf Can Learn from the NBA’s 3-Point Line

Published

on

For more than a decade, the hot topic of conversation in golf has been driving distance. Members of the media have been asking the USGA and the R&A to address the issue of driving distance and the governing bodies have essentially refused to address it to any degree… until now.

The USGA recently released their statistical analysis on driving distance and how it’s affecting the game. Their results? It’s not. The USGA claims that the increase of driving distance has been marginal since 2003 and should not cause alarm.

As soon as the report was published — you can read the report in full right here — golf writers and analysts took to Twitter, Facebook, and the airwaves, to discuss the conclusions the USGA provided.

I think, much like the sentiment with anchored putters, the real concern is that the fabric of the game will change, or already has changed and that it’s not the same game it was 20 years ago.

As the discussion ensues about driving distance and how the USGA is handling it (or ignoring it), I think the discussion is going in the wrong direction. The primary argument is that iconic courses are becoming obsolete because there is only so much real estate for those courses to lengthen. Or that it’s becoming more and more difficult to build new courses that can cater to the PGA Tour. The second half of that argument is that, if they continue to lengthen courses, then they are essentially eliminating players who don’t average 300 yards or more off the tee. At this point, I agree with the sentiment that courses don’t need to be any longer. But there is more to the story.

I think, much like the sentiment with anchored putters, the real concern is that the fabric of the game will change, or already has changed and that it’s not the same game it was 20 years ago. It’s a game that doesn’t reward shot making and short-game abilities, or the best putters on the planet. It’s a game that rewards power and the “bomb and gouge” mentality. And the argument is the bomb and gouge mentality is bad for the game.

I disagree. The game has changed because that’s what games do. They evolve.

Before we talk about the evolution of the 3-point line, let’s talk about course conditions. As lawn care advanced over the decades, golf courses have changed dramatically from tee to green. Greens haven’t always been 12 or 13 on the Stimpmeter week in and week out. With the change of the green speeds came the change of putting strokes. It also changed the way players had to fly the ball into the green for approach shots. Faster and firmer greens meant that it was harder to get the ball to stop. Grooves in irons and wedges changed, as did the ball.

The same thing happened to the fairways. When the greens became firmer and faster, so did the fairways. In a 2011 article from Golf Digest, David Toms talks about this at great length.

“[The tour has] tried to do the best they can to get the fairways firmer,” said Toms. “Guys wanted firm, fast conditions. That’s what the tour’s supposed to do. That’s part of their setup plan. So if the weather stays dry, I know they’ve tried to get them to firm up. Perhaps that translates into overall distance being a little longer.”

So, my question is, why is all the focus on the equipment? Rioting about equipment is a fruitless effort. Changing the entire marketing principle for the golf industry — Distance! Distance! Distance! — is infinitely more difficult than trying to change the set-up plan for the tour.

If people really believe that distance on the professional circuits is a problem, then we should be talking about course conditions. Let the fairways and the rough grow a little higher so that the ball doesn’t run 40 yards on a high draw. If a player wants his ball to run out, make him do it from the tee box by controlling his trajectory. A simpler solution is altering course conditions, but what if distance isn’t actually a problem? I mean, we’re really only talking about 1,000 players, right? Not the 30 million amateur golfers.

So, let’s think about it this way.

In 1967 there was no 3-point basket in the NBA, NCAA, or high school basketball. There was, however, a 3-point basket in the American Basketball Association. In an attempt to compete with the NBA, the ABA tried to spice things up in their league and one of the main ways they did that was by adding the 3-point line.

The coaches at the helm of ABA teams had coached basketball their entire careers based on a game without 3-point shots. Throwing in a basket that counted more than any other on the floor caused the coaches to rethink their entire philosophy of how the game was played. It caused the strategic problems that even lead to one game being decided by a 92-foot shot just before the buzzer. The problem was, the score before the shot was 116-118. The players on the team that made the basket didn’t realize they’d won because they weren’t thinking about the 3-pointer.

The ABA would be relatively short lived and eventually merge with the NBA. And like all established organizations, the NBA was slow to adopt change, but it finally added the 3-point line in 1979. And though it didn’t happen overnight, the game would change drastically over the course of the next three decades.

It took nearly 40 years for the game to evolve into a game where the 3-point shot was built into the repertoire of the best players in the game.

In the days before the 3-point line, basketball was played as close to the rim as possible. Big guys like Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain dominated the game down low. It was physical and focused on driving in the paint and scoring either by short lay-ups or drawing the foul inside.

When the 3-point line was added, it gave smaller guys, who didn’t stand a chance at the physical game, an opportunity to score big points from beyond the arc. In the ’96-’97 season, the leading scorer was Michael Jordan; in that season he made 111 three-point shots. In the 03’-’04 season, the leading scorer was Kevin Garnett; that season he made 88 three-point shots. In the ’15-’16 season, the leading scorer was James Harden; he made 236 three-points shots. The second leading scorer in that season was Steph Curry who made 402.

It took nearly 40 years for the game to evolve into a game where the 3-point shot was built into the repertoire of the best players in the game. It takes time for people to accept change, but it will happen.

Maybe that’s the thing that has golf enthusiasts scared; maybe they don’t want the game to change, but the problem is that it’s inevitable. It’s already happened. It changed when players stopped putting hickory shafts in their irons and using steel. It changed when players stopped using putters that looked like 1-irons and started using the mallet. It changed when Gene Sarazen invented the sand wedge.

The game has evolved, but just because we see players hitting it 330 yards, does that mean those players are the one’s winning all the tournaments? Let’s look at some numbers.

Between 2003 and 2015 the average driving distance of all winners in that period (a total of 500 events) was 293.3 yards. The average driving distance on tour was 287.8 yards. That means that, on average, the winner of a PGA Tour event was driving the ball 5 yards longer than the rest of the field. But the problem is not the average distance; it’s the top 10 percent that has everybody worried. It’s also not the majority of the tour players who take that average to new heights. What we’re seeing are about 10-12 guys that hit it over 20 yards longer than the tour average.

Can we really make huge changes in the game because we have about 15 players that are just that much longer than the rest of the field? I don’t know. Maybe we can, but like so many have said about the USGA Driving Distance Report, “It doesn’t pass the eye test.”

Screen Shot 2017-02-24 at 9.50.41 PMOut of the 500 events between ‘03 and ‘15, 160 winners averaged fewer yards off the tee than the tour average. And you have to remember that in that same span 44 events were won by Tiger Woods, 21 events were won by Phil Mickelson, 23 were won by Vijay Singh and nine were won by Dustin Johnson. Four players account for nearly 20 percent of the wins between ’03 and ’15, and all four of those players hit the ball longer than the tour average (by about 11 yards).

From of the remaining 403 events, 160 averaged less than the tour average in driving distance. That gives us right at 40 percent of the winners on tour from ’03 to ’15 averaged less than the tour average in driving distance. Even further, out of all 500 events in that time, only five players averaged more than 303.3 yards. That’s one percent of the winners averaging over 303.3 yards.

The current proposed solutions are as follows: increase the ball size (or dial the ball back) and increase club regulations. Both of those solutions are going to punish the average golfer, which is completely the wrong thing to do. The golf industry is unlike most other sports; it doesn’t make its money from the professionals, it makes its money from the amateur. So why punish the target audience for revenue? (A surefire way to hurt the game.)

The solution is much simpler. Alter the course set up. If you’re tired of players being able to hit every par-five in two, then grow the rough up and narrow the fairway at 300 yards. Dustin Johnson didn’t win at Oakmont last year because he hit the ball further than everyone else, he won the U.S. Open because drove the ball in the fairway and hit his irons close to the hole. If you look at DJ’s stats from last year, from the rough at 150-175 yards, he was T164. From 50-125 yards, he was T103.

What does that tell you? If the long hitters drive the ball in the rough, they have a harder time getting the ball close to the hole. Like everyone else.

Dustin Johnson didn’t win at Oakmont last year because he hit the ball further than everyone else, he won the U.S. Open because drove the ball in the fairway and hit his irons close to the hole.

The USGA and the PGA Tour are offended that players are hitting the ball 330 yards. And they’re even more upset by the fact that there are 30 guys who can hit it that far. That’s a PGA Tour and USGA problem; it’s not a player or a manufacturer problem. Up to this point, those entities have tried to solve “their” problem in the least creative way possible: lengthening courses. It’s the wrong way to look at it. It’s also the wrong way to look at it by assuming it’s actually a problem. Things change. Games evolve. Players get better. Equipment gets better.

So what are we so worried about? If the score of the average tournament is 20- or 21-under par, who really cares? There are only a couple of times a year that anybody wants to really see PGA Tour players struggle; the U.S. Open and the Open Championship. And players struggle for completely different reasons at those tournaments. The rest of the year just let the drama be that players are trying to beat each other. Not that they are trying to beat the course.

Let’s stop whining and enjoy watching the best players in the world do what they do. Use the ProTracer function more on your coverage. Let’s take advantage of the technology we have and show the types of shots players could hit when they are stuck behind the tree and stop complaining that they’re behind a tree because they tried to cut the corner and failed.

Driving distance is only a problem for the people who refuse to admit that the game is going to change. It’s only a problem for those who refuse to be creative with course setup and think the only way to even the playing field is to lengthen the course. If anything, they are only reinforcing what they call a problem. Players have to hit it farther to be consistently competitive if you stretch all the courses to 7,500 yards or longer. It’s a circular logic that has created an entire subcategory of “searchable problems” in golf. We don’t need any more problems, we already have the most difficult one to overcome: expense.

We’re trying to solve a problem that is only a problem based on the data points for 0.01 percent of the players who play the game. In any other industry that would be considered lunacy. Like the 3-point line changed the way basketball was played, so too will distance in golf. It’s inevitable.

You can scrutinize my calculations here.

Your Reaction?
  • 329
  • LEGIT45
  • WOW8
  • LOL3
  • IDHT1
  • FLOP8
  • OB4
  • SHANK47

Adam Crawford is a writer of many topics but golf has always been at the forefront. An avid player and student of the game, Adam seeks to understand both the analytical side of the game as well as the human aspect - which he finds the most important. You can find his books at his website, chandlercrawford.com, or on Amazon.

46 Comments

46 Comments

  1. Sean

    Mar 11, 2017 at 7:12 pm

    I never did understand all this talk of dialing back the equipment. All they need to do is change the course set up.

    However, networks probably feel this would not make for compelling TV. So fairways are cut and rolled, rough isn’t penal, etc. When the professionals play under very soggy conditions I note that many drives are in the 265-275 range.

  2. Ronald Montesano

    Mar 11, 2017 at 12:34 pm

    One of the points you’re missing is the flexibility of course set-up, contrasted with the inflexibility of an NBA court. Greens DON’T have to stimp at 12-13. Rough does not have to be set to a certain height. And most importantly, the 3-point arc of the NBA does not impact playgrounds and gymanasia, where pick-up games are played across the world.

    Shift to golf, where courses and clubs watch the tours religiously, then often seek to emulate course set-ups, to the degradation of the game (which includes loss of players for whom the game is too challenging.)

    The Tours need to look beyond their own, money-making role in this, and recognize the negative impact of what they do, on the people and their courses. We need enhance participation, not rough. We need to speed up play, not green speeds. If the tour does it, zealous club members and course denizens will compel superintendents to match wits. The regular golfer loses.

  3. Greg V

    Mar 10, 2017 at 9:48 am

    “The current proposed solutions are as follows: increase the ball size (or dial the ball back) and increase club regulations. Both of those solutions are going to punish the average golfer, which is completely the wrong thing to do.”

    I happen to disagree with that premise. If average golfers move up a tee or two, they will not be punished by a dialed-back ball.

    They will simply be playing a shorter course, and will likely take less time to play it. That could be a good thing, no?

  4. carl spackler

    Mar 10, 2017 at 8:41 am

    In the immortal words of Jean Paul Sartre, ‘Au revoir, gopher’.

  5. S Hitter

    Mar 9, 2017 at 6:36 pm

    THE dumbest article ever on WRX, worse than some of the cheerleading articles sniffing Michelle Wie’s backside.
    Look here http://www.golfchannel.com/media/golfs-lowest-rounds-58s-and-59s-tour
    You’re worried about the bomb and gougers, now? Now? Sam Snead was known to be extremely long during his time, especially in his earlier days, and people were astounded. Nobody stopped him – well, they tried to, when he tried to putt croquet-style. But nobody took away his length – and he was doing it with the old equipment with fluffy balls!
    This game has never been about a level playing field. You take it for what it is, and if you don’t have length or power, but a good enough short game and are very straight, well, you can skin this cat in many ways. But dominance is dominance. That’s the same in every sport.

    • Adam Crawford

      Mar 10, 2017 at 9:05 am

      I think you missed the actual statement the article was trying to make. It’s trying to say that it’s not actually a problem, but if it were, the solution is much simpler than changing the ball or the equipment.

  6. Tom

    Mar 9, 2017 at 10:03 am

    I’ve been curious about this issue for a while, and the way different people view it. A: golfers are more athletic now than ever, and that, combined with some increase in equipment and ball features has probably lead to some form of increased distance by the majority of the field. But, looking back, Tiger hit it a mile before all of the crazy equipment talk set in, and John Daily hit it a mile longer, well before all of this.

    The faster fairways has been my question as well, and why that’s not to blame. It’s not too typical on any course I play, to get 30-40 yards of roll. Every year I play a course within a day or two after the tour comes through, and it’s incredible how much faster the fairways are. The greens pretty typically do run between 11 and 13, so that stays the same, just on the higher end, but the fairways are like run ways compared to the way the course plays the rest of the year. I think that makes more of a difference than equipment, since equipment might account for what, 20 yards? I’m not really talking about the comparison of today’s gear to persimmon woods, but I’d be surprised to see DJ, Rory, Bubba, etc. lose more than 10-20 yards off the tee with any driver they try. Iron wise, most these guys use MB’s, and you’re going to hit one MB just as far as any other MB.

  7. Tal

    Mar 9, 2017 at 4:11 am

    I think the anaogy is the wrong way round; this dialing back distance is like taking the 3 point line away, not adding it. I don’t think professional basketball would be as it is today without that line. Nor eould golf be anywhere near as interesting if you couldn’t marvel at the distance or ball speed of the pros. I think it would really lose the spark if DJ was hitting it, say, 280.
    Part of the excitement of professional golf is watching how powerfully some guys hit it and if the ball is dialed back, the shorter hitters will still be shorter and the longer guys won’t draw as much of a crowd. Plus, plenty of great players would lose one of the elements that made them great on the first place. How is that fair?
    DJ isa great example; always one of the longest but didn’t win a major until his wedges and putting improved. Distance doesn’t win by itself as you have to capitalise on the advantage.

    So, this isn’t the same as adding the 3 point line. How fair would it be to Steph Curry if 3 pointers were taken back out of the game?

  8. David W.

    Mar 9, 2017 at 3:41 am

    I think the author is onto something here – why was the WGC in Mexico so great to watch??? Because the course was narrow and many good players were in the trees.

  9. Mat

    Mar 8, 2017 at 2:10 pm

    This analogy is only relevant if the Tour started playing Modified Stableford. I’m not opposed to that, but that’s a “3-point line”. You’re rewarding lower percentage changes with more points. The rest of this argument is irrelevant. Statistically, the game has changed, courses have changed, and it’s disingenuous to talk about “course setups”. Major changes are expensive, if at all possible. Sure, you can cut the grass a little higher, but if you do that, you’re just sounding like a whiner. So much for “Let’s stop whining…”

  10. Chris B

    Mar 8, 2017 at 1:22 pm

    I love how the usga are using stats from 2003, this doesn’t show the true impact the ball has made. Golf is becoming boarring to watch, everyone just smashes it as far and as high as they can. Some guys just hit it further. The true craft of controlling your ball is being lost. Modern equipment is more beneficial to the longer hitters.

  11. Luke

    Mar 8, 2017 at 11:31 am

    How about they play golf in normal conditions and stop following the sun round the globe. They play in high altitude climates. Come and play in the windy wet UK won’t be hitting it 350+

  12. Greg V

    Mar 8, 2017 at 11:13 am

    Stupid article. The NBA didn’t change the size of the court, they didn’t change the ball, and they didn’t change the height of the basket. It is basically the same game with different scoring.

    In golf, the ball changed, the clubs changed and the courses had to change. Same scoring. The result of the equipment and athletes’ changes required that the courses be made longer, which has increased the amount of time required to play.

    Just go back to the US Amateur before steel shafts (1927). Every match was 36 holes. Why? Because the ball didn’t go as far (and the clubs were heavy and wood), so the courses were shorter and the players could play 36 every day.

    I conclude: the better the equipment, the longer the courses. The longer the courses, the more time that it takes to play, or conversely, the less golf that we can play in the same amount of time. Why do we put up with that? Because we have egos and we want to hit the ball farther. That is self-defeating if you want to play more golf.

    By the way, a basketball game takes about 3 hours. A hockey game takes about 3 hours. A football game takes 3 to 3-1/2 hours. Golf, at 4-1/2 to 5 hours takes way too much time.

  13. RI_Redneck

    Mar 8, 2017 at 11:13 am

    The part of this article that really stands out to me is the firmness of the fairways and the lack of sufficient rough. It would not be difficult to have CERTAIN sections of the fairway that allow more rollout while having other sections less firm. So rollout will only come for those who are accurate enough to hit the right spot. Bomb and gouge is popular because there’s no penalty to hitting out of the fairway. Increase the rough length for pro tournaments and we will see them focusing more on hitting fairways and the competition will be tighter. I also think the gallery should be kept out of the rough nearer the course so that it stays at a suitable depth and is not trampled down.

    BT

    • LD

      Mar 8, 2017 at 1:01 pm

      Interesting idea, sort of like the professional oil patterns on the PBA.

  14. Steve

    Mar 8, 2017 at 11:08 am

    Lengthening courses results in longer rounds and greater maintenance costs. The ball goes longer for higher swing speeds and does not benefit most amateurs. The area that seems to evade discussion is that the ball goes straighter. The internal structure and dimple patterns on today’s ball lead to ideal high launch low spin drives. You want to bring some back shot making, bring back the balata spin rates on today’ ball.

  15. JohnFS

    Mar 8, 2017 at 10:37 am

    How about Jack’s idea of having a “tour” ball. I’ve always thought that was the best solution.

  16. Eddie

    Mar 8, 2017 at 10:34 am

    The speed at which a ball rebounds off the face of a driver has been capped since 2003. Any distance gains are due to golfers swinging faster, fairways being firmer, or dialing in perfect launch and spin rates.

    The big difference is the golfers. They are younger, stronger, and more athletic then at any other point in history. How is this any different than Palmer or Nicklaus dominating with their relative length back in the day? Length has always been an advantage.

    • Greg V

      Mar 8, 2017 at 4:39 pm

      Length will always be an advantage, no matter what ball is played.

      In essence you are right, distance gains since 2003 have been about 1 yard a year, due to lower spinning driver heads and better shafts. What the distance study fails to capture is the inordinate distance gain by equipment from about 1990 to 2003 due to solid balls, titanium large driver heads and graphite shafts. The perfect storm.

  17. Eric

    Mar 8, 2017 at 10:20 am

    So if the fairways are rolling faster, why aren’t Launch Monitors requiring that not only WIND be adjusted and SLOPE/ELEVATION to calculate proper distances, but also fairway firmness to account for ball spin/speed meeting firmer or softer ground? We’d get more accurate yardages and I’m guessing a lot more amateurs would be longer when measured on Trackman

    • Michael

      Mar 8, 2017 at 10:34 am

      What you say is true and a good point, but it isn’t close to what the article is about.

  18. Progolfer

    Mar 8, 2017 at 10:19 am

    The PGA Tour can eliminate this entire argument in a simple way: play golf courses that are narrow and demand precision and accuracy. Personally, I think it’s more fun to play courses that are difficult and require shot-making than courses where I essentially only hit driver and a wedge. I love playing courses where par is a great score. Instead, the Tour continues to think the best way to entertain the public is with long drives and lots of birdies. Is there any wonder why manufacturers constantly push for distance gains in equipment?!

  19. Steve S

    Mar 8, 2017 at 10:16 am

    I don’t care what the pros do or the rule changes that have been made for the top 1 percent. The folks I play with ignore the groove rule and the anchored putting rule. We’d ignore the COR rule too, if you could find “off the shelf” clubs that exceeded 0.83. Making the ball go shorter is lunacy for all but the longer hitters. With most amateur golfers swinging driver at well below 100mph they struggle just to get a carry distance above 200-210 yards. How much fun would it be to hit a driver 180 and a 5 iron 130? Maybe when you’re 85 years old.

  20. Darryl

    Mar 8, 2017 at 10:00 am

    I want to see the ProTracer on every shot, I love it, watching most shots where the ball instantly disappears into the sky is really pointless isn’t it???????? Why aren’t they using it more, I see Youtubers using the technology for their own little shows for crying out loud so it can’t be a cost issue.

  21. Deadeye

    Mar 8, 2017 at 9:03 am

    Why is this a problem? Unlike other games played with a ball, golf is completely adjustable. We move the tees up and back, we move the pins up and back, we have multiple sets of tee boxes. You can play any legal ball or club you like. Want more distance off the tee? Just move to a more forward tee box! Gain twenty to fifty yards instantly! You say the pros can’t do that? Screw them, if they make the cut they can make more than a million dollars a year and finish fiftieth. It’s the amateur players that pay for this game and keep it alive. The USGA needs to seriously consider making separate rules for professional players if they think distance is a problem(which they don’t). Professional tournaments should be played more on courses like Chapultepec in Mexico. Narrow fairways, more trees, difficult greens. Deep US Open type rough is not the answer. The Scots figured out long ago how to make golf more difficult, deep bunkers strategically placed, undulating greens, burns. Best advice for those seeking more distance: get fit for a new driver, don’t just buy off the rack. You could easily pick up twenty yards. And we still have to putt.

  22. Matt K

    Mar 8, 2017 at 8:57 am

    A softer compression ball would hurt a longer player more than a shorter hitter. I think. Don’t know a lot about it but if you take a ball with x compression that player A hits 250 and he compresses it fully. If you make that the limit then player B who hits its 320 will hit that ball shorter, whilst player A loses nothing. Is this sound logic?

    • Steve

      Mar 8, 2017 at 11:23 am

      It makes sense in theory, but why should the bigger, faster, stronger guy be punished over everyone else? Whether he’s naturally gifted or busts his butt in the gym, he SHOULD be hitting it a heck of a lot further than the guys that don’t work as hard.

  23. Greg Hunter

    Mar 8, 2017 at 8:18 am

    Good article!

    • LD

      Mar 8, 2017 at 9:45 am

      One of the best articles I have read on this site.

  24. Kyle

    Mar 8, 2017 at 8:18 am

    There’s a big difference between a sport evolving and the equipment evolving…
    So, should they allow metal bats in pro baseball by the same logic of this article?

    Isn’t Augusta trying to spend millions just to extend #13? Am I the only one that thinks that’s crazy???

    There’s nothing wrong with hitting the ball shorter. it means we can play shorter courses. Shorter courses have a smaller environmental impact, are easier to walk, cheaper to maintain.

    Not to mention, if you’re a short hitter, you’re going to be shorter than other players either way. The numbers change, but your comparative disadvantage is the same. So what is the point?

    • Crazy

      Mar 8, 2017 at 8:49 am

      Everything about Augusta is crazy if you think about it… And that hole is only like 515.

    • Greg V

      Mar 8, 2017 at 9:15 am

      Excellent comment. If the ball is made shorter, we can simply move up to a shorter tee.

      Mike Davis recently raised the possibility of a shorter ball for great old short courses such as Myopia Hunt Club. Good – at least the USGA is considering such a change.

      It’s time for Bill Payne to advocate for a “Masters” ball.

    • Michael

      Mar 8, 2017 at 10:55 am

      Metal bat comparison – Not really relevant. MLB has no way to counteract that effect that would destroy other aspects of the game. Pro golf has several options regarding distance gains and most of them would restore aspects of the game that have faded. If courses want to host PGA Tour/professional events let them do whatever they want to land the event. It’s their money. If you change the setups just about all of the classics can still present the appropriate challenge and excitement. The real argument here is the refusal of the PGA Tour to deal with this. It isn’t USGA or R&A equipment standards.

      My guess is 90% of all golfers are almost never playing a set up over 6600 yards. I belong to a private TPC course which can play 7500 yards. I’ve never seen anyone other than some tour members practicing or PGA section events participants play it from all the way back. The most common set up is the “Members” tees which blends the two middle tees and plays about 6400 yards with a 71.2/141 rating. The tips are set at 7400 yards and 76.2/155. If you are scratch or pro maybe this is an issue. T/hat portion of the golfing population is minuscule.

    • Steve

      Mar 8, 2017 at 11:18 am

      MLB has changed the ball many times, and they’re currently attempting to do it again…

  25. SV

    Mar 8, 2017 at 8:15 am

    Two things I noticed: 1. 2003 as the year chosen for the baseline was after the greater jump in distance had occurred from multi-piece balls, larger metal drivers and graphite shafts. 2. Citing the driving distance of winners versus tour average does not take into account the course and clubs used for the tee shots (driver vs 3 wood or 3 iron or hybrid).

    • Crazy

      Mar 8, 2017 at 8:51 am

      If you knew how driving distance stats are calculated… They pick two holes running roughly opposite ways where they think most players are very likely to hit drivers.

  26. DaveT

    Mar 8, 2017 at 8:10 am

    Absolutely spot-on!

    While the Tour is gaining distance (albeit slowly), I’m losing distance. If the need for distance in order to play increases, it becomes less fun for me. BTW, you also identified expense as the single most difficult problem golf needs to overcome. Making courses longer just makes it worse.

  27. Ian

    Mar 8, 2017 at 7:54 am

    Don’t really care what they do on the tours. I would like to play a shorter ball on a shorter course so that it wouldn’t take me 6 hours to get around.

    • Crazy

      Mar 8, 2017 at 8:51 am

      You want a shorter ball?? Just move up a set of tees.

      • Ian

        Mar 8, 2017 at 8:56 am

        No moving up a tee would only make the course shorter – I can move the ball out plenty, so all that would do it make it easier. A shorter ball and course would keep the skill requirement up but shorten the round time because I wouldn’t need to walk as far.

        • Scott

          Mar 8, 2017 at 10:46 am

          I am not sure that I understand. You mention playing a long course with a shorter distance ball. Then because the ball goes less, you want to play a shorter course which is different from the one you are currently playing , but you don’t want to move up a set of tees at the course you are playing? All in an effort to save some steps and play in a shorter amount of time? Maybe try tennis.

          • Ian

            Mar 8, 2017 at 11:14 am

            Never said a longer course. Shorter course and shorter ball = fewer steps and more importantly less time.

            • Steve

              Mar 8, 2017 at 11:20 am

              How about driving a cart… then you can take minimal steps and drive a heck of a lot faster than you walk.

              • George

                Mar 9, 2017 at 4:35 pm

                I can walk my 6600yd home course in 2h45 without getting out of breath. I played single behind a 4-ball in Scotland taking 3h for 18 holes (no need to play through). And I’ve played 6000yd courses in FL driving a cart that took me 4h. Your argument stinks.

    • Michael

      Mar 8, 2017 at 11:01 am

      If it is taking you six hours to play the issue is one of two things or both:

      1. You need basic instruction and aren’t really ready to be on the course yet and haven’t learned basic golf etiquette and rules of the game.

      And/or …

      2. The course where you are playing is horribly mismanaged and there is no rangering program or enforcement of the rules and policies.

      • Ian

        Mar 8, 2017 at 11:16 am

        Thanks bud, off a 5 so you tell me.
        Good course but no marshalls.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

19th Hole

Vincenzi’s 2024 Valspar Championship betting preview: Elite ballstrikers to thrive at Copperhead

Published

on

The PGA TOUR will stay in Florida this week for the 2024 Valspar Championship.

The Copperhead Course at Innisbrook Resort is a par 71 measuring 7,340 yards and features Bermudagrass greens overseeded with POA. Infamous for its difficulty, the track will be a tough test for golfers as trouble lurks all over the place. Holes 16, 17 and 18 — also known as the “Snake Pit” — make up one of the toughest three-hole stretches in golf and should lead to a captivating finish on Sunday.

The field is comprised of 156 golfers teeing it up. The field this week is solid and is a major improvement over last year’s field that felt the impact of players skipping due to a handful of “signature events” in a short span of time. 

Past Winners at Valspar Championship

  • 2023: Taylor Moore (-10)
  • 2022: Sam Burns (-17)
  • 2021: Sam Burns (-17)
  • 2019: Paul Casey (-8)
  • 2018: Paul Casey (-10)
  • 2017: Adam Hadwin (-14)
  • 2016: Charl Schwartzel (-7)
  • 2015: Jordan Spieth (-10)

In this article and going forward, I’ll be using the Rabbit Hole by Betsperts Golf data engine to develop my custom model. If you want to build your own model or check out all of the detailed stats, you can sign up using promo code: MATTVIN for 25% off any subscription package (yearly is best value). 

Key Stats For Copperhead

1. Strokes Gained: Approach

Strokes Gained: Approach grades out as the most important statistic once again this week. Copperhead really can’t be overpowered and is a second-shot golf course.

Total SG: Approach Over Past 24 Rounds (per round)

  1. Tony Finau (+.90)
  2. Nick Taylor (+.81)
  3. Justin Thomas (+.77)
  4. Greyson Sigg (+.69)
  5. Christiaan Bezuidenhout (+.67)

2. Good Drive %

The long hitters can be a bit limited here due to the tree-lined fairways and penal rough. Playing from the fairways will be important, but laying back too far will cause some difficult approaches with firm greens that may not hold shots from long irons.

Golfers who have a good balance of distance and accuracy have the best chance this week.

Good Drive % Over Past 24 Rounds

  1. Brice Garnett (+91.3%) 
  2. Zach Johnson (+91.1%)
  3. Sam Ryder (+90.5%)
  4. Ryan Moore (+90.4%)
  5. Aaron Rai (+89.7%)

3. Strokes Gained: Ball Striking

Adding ball-striking puts even more of a premium on tee-to-green prowess in the statistical model this week. Golfers who rank highly in ball-striking are in total control of the golf ball which is exceedingly important at Copperhead.

SG: Ball Striking Over Past 24 Rounds:

  1. Xander Schauffele (+1.32)
  2. Keith Mitchell (+1.29)
  3. Tony Finau (+1.24)
  4. Cameron Young (+1.17) 
  5. Doug Ghim (+.95)

4. Bogey Avoidance

With the conditions likely to be difficult, avoiding bogeys will be crucial this week. In a challenging event like the Valspar, oftentimes the golfer who is best at avoiding mistakes ends up on top.

Gritty golfers who can grind out difficult pars have a much better chance in an event like this than a low-scoring birdie-fest.

Bogey Avoidance Over Past 24 Rounds

  1. Brice Garnett (+9.0)
  2. Xander Schauffele (+9.3)
  3. Austin Cook (+9.7) 
  4. Chesson Hadley (+10.0)
  5. Greyson Sigg (+10.2)

5. Strokes Gained: Total in Difficult Conditions

Conditions will be tough this week at Copperhead. I am looking for golfers who can rise to the occasion if the course plays as difficult as it has in the past.

Strokes Gained: Total in Difficult Conditions Over Past 24 rounds

  1. Xander Schauffele (+1,71) 
  2. Min Woo Lee (+1.39)
  3. Cameron Young (+1.27)
  4. Jordan Spieth (+1.08)
  5. Justin Suh (+.94)

6. Course History

That statistic will tell us which players have played well at Copperhead in the past.

Course History Over Past 24 rounds

  1. Patrick Cantlay (+3.75) 
  2. Sam Burns (+2.49)
  3. Davis Riley (+2.33)
  4. Matt NeSmith (+2.22)
  5. Jordan Spieth (+2.04)

The Valspar Championship Model Rankings

Below, I’ve compiled overall model rankings using a combination of the five key statistical categories previously discussed — SG: Approach (27%), Good Drive % (15%), SG: BS (20%), Bogeys Avoided (13%), Course History (13%) Strokes Gained: Total in Difficult Conditions (12%).

  1. Xander Schauffele
  2. Doug Ghim
  3. Victor Perez
  4. Greyson Sigg
  5. Ryan Moore
  6. Tony Finau
  7. Justin Thomas
  8. Sam Ryder
  9. Sam Burns
  10. Lucas Glover

2024 Valspar Championship Picks

Justin Thomas +1400 (DraftKings)

Justin Thomas will be disappointed with his finish at last week’s PLAYERS Championship, as the past champion missed the cut despite being in some decent form heading into the event. Despite the missed cut, JT hit the ball really well. In his two rounds, the two-time major champion led the field in Strokes Gained: Approach per round.

Thomas has been up and down this season. He’s missed the cut in two “signature events” but also has finishes of T12 at the Arnold Palmer Invitational, T12 at the Waste Management Phoenix Open, T6 at the Pebble Beach AT&T Pro-Am and T3 at the American Express. In his past 24 rounds, he ranks 3rd in the field in Strokes Gained: Approach and 6th in Strokes Gained: Ball Striking in the field.

Thomas loves Copperhead. In his last three tries at the course, he’s finished T13, T3 and T10. Thomas would have loved to get a win at a big event early in the season, but avoidable mistakes and a balky putter have cost him dearly. I believe a trip to a course he loves in a field he should be able to capitalize on is the right recipe for JT to right the ship.

Christiaan Bezuidenhout +6000 (FanDuel)

Christiaan Bezuidenhout is playing spectacular golf in the 2024 season. He finished 2nd at the American Express, T20 at Pebble Beach and T24 at the Genesis Invitational before finishing T13 at last week’s PLAYERS Championship.

In his past 24 rounds, the South African ranks 3rd in the field in Strokes Gained: Approach and 26th in Strokes Gained: Ball Striking. Bezuidenhout managed to work his way around TPC Sawgrass last week with minimal damage. He only made five bogeys in the entire week, which is a great sign heading into a difficult Copperhead this week.

Bezuidenhout is winless in his PGA Tour career, but certainly has the talent to win on Tour. His recent iron play tells me that this week could be a breakthrough for the 35-year-old who has eyes on the President’s Cup.

Doug Ghim +8000 (FanDuel)

Doug Ghim has finished in the top-16 of his past five starts. Most recently, Ghim finished T16 at The PLAYERS Championship in a loaded field.

In his past 24 rounds, Ghim ranks 8th in Strokes Gained: Approach and 5th in Strokes Gained: Ball Striking. In terms of his fit for Copperhead, the 27-year-old ranks 12th in Bogey Avoidance and 7th in Strokes Gained: Total in Difficult Conditions, making him a great fit for the course.

Ghim has yet to win on Tour, but at one point he was the top ranked Amateur golfer in the world and played in the 2017 Arnold Palmer Cup and 2017 Walker Cup. He then won the Ben Hogan award for the best male college golfer in 2018. He certainly has the talent, and there are signals aplenty that his talent in ready to take him to the winner’s circle on the PGA Tour.

Sepp Straka +8000 (BetRivers)

Sepp Straka is a player who’s shown he has the type of game that can translate to a difficult Florida golf course. The former Presidents Cup participant won the 2022 Honda Classic in tough conditions and should thrive with a similar test at Copperhead.

It’s been a slow 2024 for Straka, but his performance last week at the PLAYERS Championship surely provides some optimism. He gained 5.4 strokes on approach as well as 1.88 strokes off the tee. The tee-to-green game Straka showed on a course with plenty of danger demonstrates that he can stay in control of his golf ball this week.

It’s possible that the strong performance last week was an outlier, but I’m willing to bet on a proven winner in a weaker field at a great number.

Victor Perez +12000 (FanDuel)

Victor Perez is no stranger to success in professional golf. The Frenchman has three DP World Tour wins including a Rolex Series event. He won the 2019 Alfred Dunhill Links Championship, as well as the 2023 Abu Dhabi HSBC Championship, which are some big events.

Perez earned his PGA Tour card this season and enters the week playing some fantastic golf. He finished in a tie for 16th in Florida at the Cognizant Classic and then tied for third in his most recent start at the Puerto Rico Open.

In his past 24 rounds in the field, Perez ranks 11th in Strokes Gained: Approach, 1oth in Strokes Gained: Ball Striking, 6th in Good Drive % and 15th in Bogey Avoidance.

Perez comes in as a perfect fit for Copperhead and offers serious value at triple-digit odds.

Your Reaction?
  • 9
  • LEGIT2
  • WOW0
  • LOL0
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP1
  • OB1
  • SHANK3

Continue Reading

Opinion & Analysis

Myrtle Beach, Explored: February in South Carolina

Published

on

As I gain in experience and age, and familiarity breeds neither contempt nor disdain, I understand why people return to a place. A destination like Myrtle Beach offers a sizable supply and diversity of restaurants, entertainment venues, and shops that are predicated on the tenets of the service industry. Greet your customers with a smile and a kind word, and they will find comfort and assurance. Provide them with a memorable experience and they will suggest your place of business to others.

My first tour of Myrtle Beach took place in the mid-1980s, and consisted of one course: Gator Hole. I don’t remember much from that day, and since Gator Hole closed a decade later, I cannot revisit it to recollect what I’d lost. Since then, I’ve come to the Grand Strand a few times, and been fortunate to never place a course more than once. I’ve seen the Strantz courses to the south and dipped my toe in the North Carolina courses of Calabash. I’ve been to many in the middle, including Dunes, Pine Lakes, Grande Dunes among them.

2024 brought a quartet of new courses, including two at the Barefoot Resort. I’d heard about the North Myrtle Beach four-pack of courses that highlight the Barefoot property, including layouts from Pete Dye, Tom Fazio, Davis Love III, and Greg Norman. I had the opportunity to play and shoot the Dye and Fazio tracks, which means that I’ll have to return to see the other two. Sandwiched between them were the TPC-Myrtle Beach course, also from Tom Fazio, and the Pawley’s Plantation trace, by the hand of Jack Nicklaus. I anticipated a bit of the heroic, and bit of the strategic, and plenty of eye candy. None of those architects would ever be considered a minimalist, so there would be plenty of in-play and out-of-play bunkers and mounds to tantalize the senses.

My nephew arrived a few days early, to screen a few more courses. As a result, you the reader will have an extra quarter of mini-reviews, bringing the total of courses in this piece to eight. It was inconceivable that CJR would play four courses that I had never played nor photographed, but that was the case. His words appear at the end of this piece. We hope that you enjoy the tour.

Main Feature: Two Barefoots, a TPC, and Pawley’s Plantation

Barefoot Dye

What Paul “Pete” Dye brought back from his trips to the United Kingdom, hearkened back to what C.B. MacDonal did, some 65 years prior. There is a way of finding bunkers and fairways, and even green sites, that does not require major industrial work. The Dye course at Barefoot Resorts takes you on a journey over the rumpled terrain of distant places. If there’s one element missing, it’s the creased and turbulent fairways, so often found in England and Ireland. The one tenet of playing a Dye course, is to always aim away from temptation, from where your eyes draw you. Find the safe side of the target, and you’ll probably find your ball. It then stands that you will have a shot for your next attempt. Cut the corner, and you might have need to reload. The Barefoot course begins gently, in terms of distance, but challenges with visual deception. After two brief 4s and a 3, the real work begins. The course is exposed enough, to allow the coastal winds to dance along the fairways. Be ready to keep the ball low and take an extra club or two.

TPC-Myrtle Beach

If memory serves, TPCMB is my first trek around a TPC-branded course. It had all the trappings of a tour course, from the welcome, through the clubhouse, to the practice facilities and, of course, the course. TPC-Myrtle Beach is a Tom Fazio design, and if you never visit Augusta National, you’ll now have an idea of what it is like. You play Augusta’s 16th hole twice at TPCMB, and you enjoy it both times. Fazio really likes the pond-left, green-angle-around par three hole, and his two iterations of it are memorable.

You’ll also see those Augusta bunkers, the ones with the manicured edges that drop into a modestly-circular form. What distinguishes these sand pits is the manner in which they rise from the surrounding ground. They are unique in that they don’t resemble the geometric bunkering of a Seth Raynor, nor the organic pits found in origin courses. They are built, make no mistake, and recovery from them is manageable for all levels of bunker wizardry.

Barefoot Fazio

If you have the opportunity to play the two Tom Fazio courses back to back, you’ll notice a marked difference in styling. Let me digress for a moment, then circle back with an explanation. It was written that the NLE World Woods course designed by Fazio, Pine Barrens, was an homage to Pine Valley, the legendary, New Jersey club where Fazio is both a member and the architect on retainer. The Pine Barrens course was plowed under in 2022, so the homage no longer exists. At least, I didn’t think that it existed, until I played his Barefoot Resort course in North Myrtle Beach.

Pine Valley might be described as an aesthetic of scrub and sand. There are mighty, forced carries to travers, along with sempiternal, sandy lairs to avoid. Barefoot Fazio is quite similar. If you’re not faced with a forced carry, you’ll certainly contend with a fairway border or greenside necklace of sand. When you reach the 13th tee, you’ll face a drive into a fairway, and you might see a distant green, with a notable absence: flagstick. The 13th is the icing on the homage cake, a callout of the 8th hole at Pine Valley. Numero Ocho at the OG has two greens, side by side, and they change the manner in which the hole plays (so they say.) At Barefoot Fazio, the right-side green is a traditional approach, with an unimpeded run of fairway to putting surface. The left-side green (the one that I was fortunate to play) demands a pitch shot over a wasteland. It’s a fitting tribute for the rest of us to play.

Be certain to parrot the starter, Leon’s, advice, and play up a deck of tees. Barefoot Fazio offers five par-three holes, so the fours and fives play that much longer. Remember, too, that you are on vacation. Why not treat yourself to some birdie looks?

Pawley’s Plantation

The Jack Nicklaus course at Pawley’s Plantation emerged from a period of hibernation in 2024. The greens were torn up and their original contours were restored. Work was overseen by Troy Vincent, a member of the Nicklaus Architecture team. In addition, the putting corridors were reseeded with a hardier, dwarf bermuda that has experienced great success, all along the Grand Strand that is Myrtle Beach.

My visit allowed me to see the inward half first, and I understand why the resort wishes to conclude your day on those holes. The front nine of Pawley’s Plantation works its way through familiar, low country trees and wetlands. The back nine begins in similar fashion, then makes its way east, toward the marsh that separates mainland from Pawley’s Island. Recalling the powerful sun of that Wednesday morning, any round beginning on the second nine would face collateral damage from the warming star. Much better to hit holes 11 to close when the sun is higher in the sky.

The marshland holes (12 through 17) are spectacular in their raw, unprotected nature. The winds off the Atlantic are unrelenting and unforgiving, and the twin, par-three holes will remain in your memory banks for time’s march. In typical Golden Bear fashion, a majority of his putting targets are smallish in nature, reflecting his appreciation for accurate approach shots. Be sure to find the forgiving side of each green, and err to that portion. You’ll be grateful.

Bonus Coverage: Myrtlewood, Beechwood, Arrowhead, and King’s North

Arrowhead (Raymond Floyd and Tom Jackson)

A course built in the middle of a community, water threatens on most every hole. The Cypress 9 provides a few holes forcing a carried drive then challenge you with water surrounding the green. On Waterway, a drivable 2nd hole will tempt most, so make sure the group ahead has cleared the green.

Myrtlewood (Edmund Alt and Arthur Hills) and Beechwood (Gene Hamm)

A middle of the winter New Englander’s paradise. Wide open fairways, zero blind shots and light rough allow for shaking off the rust and plenty of forgiveness. A plethora of dog legs cause one to be cautious with every tee shot. Won’t break the bank nor the scorecard.

King’s North @ Myrtle Beach National (Arnold Palmer)

A signature Arnold Palmer course, waste areas, island greens and daring tee shots. Highlighted by the 4th hole Par 5 Gambler hole, if you can hit the smaller fairway on the left you are rewarded with a short approach to get to the green in 2. The back 9 is highlighted by an island green par 3 and a finisher with over 40 bunkers spread throughout. A challenge for any golfer.
Your Reaction?
  • 2
  • LEGIT0
  • WOW0
  • LOL0
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP1
  • OB0
  • SHANK1

Continue Reading

19th Hole

Vincenzi’s 2024 Players Championship betting preview: Pete Dye specialists ready to pass tough TPC Sawgrass test

Published

on

The PGA Tour heads to TPC Sawgrass to play in one of the most prestigious and important events of the season: THE PLAYERS Championship. Often referred to as the fifth major, the importance of a PLAYERS victory to the legacy of a golfer can’t be overlooked.

TPC Sawgrass is a par-72 measuring 7,245 yards and featuring Bermudagrass greens. Golfers must be patient in attacking this Pete Dye course.

With trouble lurking at every turn, the strokes can add up quickly. With a par-5 16th that is a true risk-reward hole and the famous par-3 17th island green, the only safe bet at TPC Sawgrass is a bet on an exciting finish.

THE PLAYERS Championship field is often referred to as the strongest field of the year — and with good reason. There are 144 in the field, including 43 of the world’s top 50 players in the OWGR. Tiger Woods will not be playing in the event.

THE PLAYERS is an exceptionally volatile event that has never seen a back-to-back winner.

Past Winners at TPC Sawgrass

  • 2023: Scottie Scheffler (-17)
  • 2022: Cameron Smith (-13)
  • 2021: Justin Thomas (-14)
  • 2019: Rory McIlroy (-16)
  • 2018: Webb Simpson (-18)
  • 2017: Si-Woo Kim (-10)
  • 2016: Jason Day (-15)
  • 2015: Rickie Fowler (-12)In this article and going forward, I’ll be using the Rabbit Hole by Betsperts Golf data engine to develop my custom model. If you want to build your own model or check out all of the detailed stats, you can sign up using promo code: MATTVIN for 25% off any subscription package (yearly is best value). 

5 Key Stats for TPC Sawgrass

Let’s take a look at five metrics key for TPC Sawgrass to determine which golfers boast top marks in each category over their last 24 rounds.

1. Strokes Gained: Approach

Strokes Gained: Approach has historically been far and away the most important and predictive stat at THE PLAYERS Championship. With water everywhere, golfers can’t afford to be wild with their iron shots. Not only is it essential to avoid the water, but it will also be as important to go after pins and make birdies because scores can get relatively low.

Total SG: Approach Over Past 24 Rounds

  1. Tom Hoge (+1.37) 
  2. Scottie Scheffler (+1.20)
  3. Tony Finau (+0.99)
  4. Jake Knapp (+0.83)
  5. Shane Lowry (+0.80)

2. Total Driving

This statistic is perfect for TPC Sawgrass. Historically, driving distance hasn’t been a major factor, but since the date switch to March, it’s a bit more significant. During this time of year, the ball won’t carry quite as far, and the runout is also shorter.

Driving accuracy is also crucial due to all of the trouble golfers can get into off of the tee. Therefore, players who are gaining on the field with Total Driving will put themselves in an ideal spot this week.

Total Driving Over Past 24 Rounds

  1. Rory McIlroy (22)
  2. Akshay Bhatia (25)
  3. Keith Mitchell (25) 
  4. Adam Hadwin (34)
  5. Sam Burns (+39)

3. Strokes Gained: Total at Pete Dye Designs

TPC Sawgrass may be Pete Dye’s most famous design, and for good reason. The course features Dye’s typical shaved runoff areas and tricky green complexes.  Pete Dye specialists love TPC Sawgrass and should have a major advantage this week.

SG: Total (Pete Dye) per round over past 36 rounds:

  1. Patrick Cantlay (+2.02)
  2. Scottie Scheffler (+1.90)
  3. Min Woo Lee (+1.77) 
  4. Sungjae Im (+1.72)
  5. Brian Harman (+1.62) 

4. Strokes Gained: Ball Striking

Prototypical ball-strikers have dominated TPC Sawgrass. With past winners like Sergio Garcia, Henrik Stenson, Webb Simpson, Rory McIlroy and Justin Thomas, it’s evident that golfers must be striking it pure to contend at THE PLAYERS.

SG: Ball Striking Over Past 24 Rounds

  1. Scottie Scheffler (+2.02)
  2. Tony Finau (+1.51)
  3. Tom Hoge (+1.48)
  4. Keith Mitchell (+1.38)
  5. Will Zalatoris (+1.18)

5. Par 5 Average

Par-5 average is extremely important at TPC Sawgrass. With all four of the Par-5s under 575 yards, and three of them under 540 yards, a good amount of the scoring needs to come from these holes collectively.

Par 5 Average Over Past 24 Rounds

  1. Scottie Schefler (+4.31)
  2. Erik Van Rooyen (+4.35)
  3. Doug Ghim (+4.34)
  4. Wyndham Clark (+4.34)
  5. Matt Fitzpatrick (+4.31)

6. Strokes Gained: Florida

We’ve used this statistic over the past few weeks, and I’d like to incorporate some players who do well in Florida into this week’s model as well. 

Strokes Gained: Florida over past 30 rounds:

  1. Scottie Schefler (+2.43)
  2. Erik Van Rooyen (+1.78)
  3. Doug Ghim (+1.78)
  4. Wyndham Clark (+1.73)
  5. Matt Fitzpatrick (+1.69)

7. Strokes Gained: Total on Courses with High Water Danger

With water everywhere at TPC Sawgrass, the blow-up potential is high. It can’t hurt to factor in some players who’ve avoided the “eject” button most often in the past. 

Strokes Gained: Total on Courses with High Water Danger over past 30 rounds:

  1. Scottie Schefler (+2.08)
  2. Rory McIlroy (+1.82)
  3. Tony Finau (+1.62)
  4. Patrick Cantlay (+1.51)
  5. Will Zalatoris (+1.49)

THE PLAYERS Championship Model Rankings

Below, I’ve compiled overall model rankings using a combination of the five key statistical categories previously discussed — SG: Approach (25%), Total Driving (20%), SG: Total Pete Dye (14%), SG: Ball-striking (15%) SG: Par 5 (8%), SG: Florida (10%) and SG: High Water (8%).

  1. Scottie Scheffler 
  2. Shane Lowry 
  3. Tony Finau 
  4. Corey Conners
  5. Keith Mitchell
  6. Justin Thomas
  7. Will Zalatoris
  8. Xander Schauffele
  9. Cameron Young
  10. Doug Ghim
  11. Sam Burns 
  12. Chris Kirk
  13. Collin Morikawa
  14. Si Woo Kim
  15. Wyndham Clark

2024 THE PLAYERS Championship Picks

(All odds at the time of writing)

Patrick Cantlay +2500 (DraftKings):

Patrick Cantlay is winless since the 2022 BMW Championship but is undoubtedly one of the most talented players on the PGA Tour. Since the win at Wilmington Country Club, the 31-year-old has twelve top-10 finishes on Tour and is starting to round into form for the 2024 season.

Cantlay has done well in the most recent “signature” events this season, finishing 4th at Riviera for the Genesis Invitational and 12th at Bay Hill for the Arnold Palmer Invitational. The former Tour Championship winner resides in Jupiter, Florida and has played some good golf in the state, including finishing in a tie for 4th at the 2023 Arnold Palmer Invitational. His history at TPC Sawgrass has been up and down, but his best career start at The PLAYERS came last year when he finished in a tie for 19th.

Cantlay absolutely loves Pete Dye designed courses and ranks 1st in the field in Strokes Gained: Total on Dye tracks in his past 36 rounds. In recent years, he’s been excellent at both the RBC Heritage and the Travelers Championship. TPC Sawgrass is a place where players will have to be dialed in with their irons and distance off the tee won’t be quite as important. In his past 24, rounds, Cantlay ranks in the field in Strokes Gained: Approach.

Despite being winless in recent years, I still believe Cantlay is capable of winning big tournaments. As one of the only United States players to bring their best game to Marco Simone for the Ryder Cup, I have conviction that the former top amateur in the world can deliver when stakes are high.

Will Zalatoris +3000 (FanDuel):

In order to win at TPC Sawgrass, players will need to be in total control of their golf ball. At the moment, Will Zalatoris is hitting it as well as almost anyone and finally has the putter cooperating with his new switch to the broomstick style.

Zalatoris is coming off back-to-back starts where he absolutely striped the ball. He finished 2nd at the Genesis Invitational and 4th at the Arnold Palmer Invitational where his statistics were eye opening. For the week at Bay Hill, Zal gained 5.0 strokes on approach and 5.44 strokes off the tee.

Throughout the early part of his career, Zalatoris has established himself by playing his best golf in the strongest fields with the most difficult conditions. A tough test will allow him to separate himself this week and breakthrough for a PLAYERS Championship victory.

Shane Lowry +4000 (DraftKings):

History has shown us that players need to be in good form to win the PLAYERS Championship and it’s hard to find anyone not named Scottie Scheffler who’s in better form that Shane Lowry at the moment. He finished T4 at the Cognizant Classic followed by a solo third place finish at the Arnold Palmer Invitational.

The fact that the Irishman contended at Bay Hill is a great sign considering he’s really struggled there throughout his career. He will now head to a different style of course in Florida where he’s had a good deal of success. He finished 8th at TPC Sawgrass in 2021 and 13th in 2022. 

Lowry ranks 6th in the field in approach in his past 24 rounds, 7th in Strokes Gained: Total at Pete Dye designed courses in his last 30 rounds, 8th in par 5 scoring this season, and 4th in Strokes Gained: Total in Florida over his past 36 rounds.

Lowry is a player who’s capable of winning big events. He’s a major champion and won another premier event at Wentworth as well as a WGC at Firestone. He’s also a form player, when he wins it’s typically when he’s contended in recent starts. He’s been terrific thus far in Florida and he should get into contention once again this week.

Brian Harman +8000 (DraftKings):

(Note: Since writing this Harman’s odds have plummeted to 50-1. I would not advise betting the 50).

Brian Harman showed us last season that if the course isn’t extremely long, he has the accuracy both off the tee and with his irons to compete with anyone in the world. Last week at Bay Hill and was third in the field in Strokes Gained: Approach, gaining 5.54 strokes on the field in the category.

In addition to the strong iron play, Harman also gained strokes off the tee in three of four rounds. He’s also had success at Pete Dye tracks recently. He finished 2nd at last year’s Travelers Championship and 7th at the RBC Heritage.

It would be a magnificent feat for Harman to win both the Open Championship and PLAYERS in a short time frame, but the reality is the PGA Tour isn’t quite as strong as it once was. Harman is a player who shows up for the biggest events and his odds seem way too long for his recent track record.

Tony Finau +6500 (FanDuel):

A few weeks ago, at the Genesis Invitational, I bet Hideki Matsuyama because I believed it to be a “bet the number” play at 80-1. I feel similarly about Finau this week. While he’s not having the season many people expected of him, he is playing better than these odds would indicate.

This season, Tony has a tied for 6th place finish at Torrey Pines, a tied for 19th at Riviera and tied for 13th at the Mexico Open. He’s also hitting the ball extremely well. In the field in his past 24 rounds, he ranks 3rd in Strokes Gained: Approach, 3rd in Strokes Gained: Ball Striking, 6th in Par 5 average and 15th in Total Driving.

Finau’s problem has been with the putter, which has been undeniably horrific. However, this week he will see a putting surface similar to the POA at TPC Scottsdale and PGA West, which he’s had a great deal of success on. It’s worth taking a stab at this price to see if he can have a mediocre week with the flat stick.

Sungjae Im +9000 (FanDuel):

It’s been a lackluster eighteen months for Sungjae, who once appeared to be a certain star. While his ceiling is absolutely still there, it’s been a while since we’ve seen Im play the type of golf expected of a player with his talent.

Despite the obvious concerns, the South Korean showed glimpses of a return to form last week at the Arnold Palmer Invitational. He tied for 18th place and gained strokes off the tee, on approach, around the green and with the putter. When at his best, Im is a perfect course fit for TPC Sawgrass. He has remarkable precision off the tee, can get dialed in with his irons on shorter courses and can get up and down with the best players on Tour.

This number has gotten to the point where I feel comfortable taking a shot on it.

Billy Horschel +20000 (FanDuel):

Billy Horschel is a great fit on paper for TPC Sawgrass. He can get dialed in with his irons and his lack of distance off the tee won’t be a major detriment at the course. “Bermuda Billy” does his best work putting on Bermudagrass greens and he appears to be rounding into form just in time to compete at The PLAYERS.

In his most recent start, Billy finished in a tie for 9th at the Cognizant Classic and hit the ball extremely well. The former Florida Gator gained 3.32 strokes on approach and 2.04 strokes off the tee. If Horschel brings that type of ball striking to TPC Sawgrass, he has the type of putter who can win a golf tournament.

Horschel has been great on Pete Dye designed courses, with four of his seven career PGA Tour wins coming on Dye tracks.

In a season that has seen multiple long shots win big events, the 37-year-old is worth a stab considering his knack for playing in Florida and winning big events.

 

Your Reaction?
  • 30
  • LEGIT10
  • WOW4
  • LOL2
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP3
  • OB1
  • SHANK6

Continue Reading

WITB

Facebook

Trending