Month: December 2012

Pro-Bowl Thoughts

stevenlourie News

On Twitter (@stevenlourie), I tweeted “It’s the most infuriating day of the year. Time to read this year’s Pro-Bowl rosters.” And I’m not referring to the stupidity of a game that none of the players care about anyway (my solution: make it like All-American teams, announce the teams, but never play the game. It’s still an honor to be named). I frequently have beefs with Pro-Bowl rosters and this is because, in football, individual players cannot be judged properly by commonly available statistics.

What does a sack mean? It means you tackled the quarterbacks behind the line of scrimmage. However, if you’re unblocked or blocked by a back, a sack is because less indicative of pass rushing skill than if you get a sack while unblocked. Or if you get a sack when the quarterback has barely been in the pocket for 3 seconds, as opposed to one where the quarterback has been sitting back there scanning the field, trying to find an open receiver for 5.

Taking things like quarterback hits (hitting a quarterback while he throws or legally after he throws) and quarterback hurries (forcing the quarterback to throw quicker than he’d like with pressure) helps paint a more accurate picture, but even that doesn’t take everything into account. You really need to watch every snap with a keen eye (or have someone do so on your behalf) to truly understand pass rushers’ skill level.

How about tackles? This might be the most useless one. If you get a tackle after you surrender a 25 yard completion, you didn’t do a whole lot of good, but if you tackled a guy two yards from the line of scrimmage, you’re actually stopping someone. This is where the statistic “stops” comes into play, with a stop meaning you tackle someone within 4 yards of the line of scrimmage on 1st down, within 6 yards on 2nd down, and before the first down marker on 3rd or 4th down, but even this can’t properly measure things like taking on two blockers to free up someone else to make a play. Like with sacks, you need someone to watch every snap (more on this later).

What about interceptions? This is also, in a vacuum, a useless statistic. If you get a bunch of interceptions because you’re being thrown on frequently because you suck in coverage, you’re not doing a lot of good and likewise some of the best defensive backs in the league have 3 interceptions or fewer. At the same time, a defensive back can have a 3 interception season and then a 7 interception season and not actually play any better. Some interceptions have a higher level of difficulty than other. Taking things into account like pass deflections and quarterback stats against help paint a better picture, but once again this doesn’t tell the full story. Sometimes, there’s simply nothing you can do to prevent a completion.

Offensive stats are better. Passing, rushing, and receiving yards aren’t perfect, but they’re better than traditional defensive stats, but for offensive lineman, there are no stats easily available and even if you know how many sacks someone allows, that doesn’t paint the whole picture the same way sacks don’t paint the whole picture for a pass rusher.

It’s not fans’ faults. The common fan doesn’t care enough to do all the work themselves (I don’t either) nor do they care enough to subscribe to a service like Pro Football Focus to do the work for them, which I and actually several NFL teams themselves do. As a result, we get generally crappy Pro-Bowl rosters. These have improved in past years because there’s more of a belief in more advanced statistics and there’s more readily available. Pro Football Focus (who I swear by) releases every two weeks their Pro-Bowl picks for non-subscribers. However, there are still a lot of flaws. Here are my thoughts by position. I also made my Pro-Bowl picks a few weeks ago.

AFC Quarterbacks: Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Matt Schaub

Manning and Brady were obvious choices. You don’t need advanced statistics to tell you that. I had Roethlisberger over Schaub, but of course that was before Roethlisberger choked away the season in the last 2 weeks. I’m just glad it wasn’t turnover machine Andrew Luck, who has led his team to a farce of a 10-5 record against a crappy schedule against with just 1 convincing win by more than a touchdown.

NFC Quarterbacks: Aaron Rodgers, Matt Ryan, Robert Griffin

My exact picks. Again, traditional stats work fine for quarterbacks.

AFC Running Backs: Arian Foster, Jamaal Charles, Ray Rice

Here’s where traditional statistics let you down even with skill position players: fantasy football. Arian Foster is great in fantasy football with 1328 rushing yards and 14 rushing touchdowns, ranking 2nd in the AFC in rushing yards behind Jamaal Charles. However, in reality, he didn’t have that good of a year. He averaged just 4.0 yards per carry and only had so many yards because he got 335 carries, 21 more than anyone in the NFL and 57 more than anyone in the AFC.

He also ran behind a great offensive line and any back could total those kinds of numbers behind that line with that many carries. He averaged just 2.1 yards per carry after contact, a figure that only 7 eligible backs did worse than. The only thing commendable about his season was that he managed to have that many carries without getting hurt, but if he had, any back filling in for him probably would have given them comparable production.

Add in his surprisingly mediocre season as a pass catcher and the fact that only 5 backs graded out worse than him in pass protection and you have a guy who actually graded out below average on ProFootballFocus. He should have been replaced with someone like CJ Spiller, who averaged a league leading 6.5 yards per carry, a league leading 3.9 yards per carry after contact. Spiller had 143 fewer rushing yards than Foster despite having 152 fewer carries. Apparently all that separated Spiller from being a Pro-Bowl caliber back like Foster was 152 1-yard carries. Add in Spiller’s passing game advantage and he actually outgained Foster by 50 total yards this year, despite 149 fewer touches.

NFC Running Backs: Adrian Peterson, Marshawn Lynch, Frank Gore

I had Martin over Gore, but the difference is negligible.

AFC Fullback: Vonta Leach

Got this one right.

NFC Fullback: Jerome Felton

I had Bruce Miller over Felton, but again, negligible difference.

AFC Wide Receivers: AJ Green, Andre Johnson, Reggie Wayne, Wes Welker

I had Demaryius Thomas over Wes Welker, but again negligible.

NFC Wide Receivers: Calvin Johnson, Brandon Marshall, Julio Jones, Victor Cruz

Jones making it in over teammate Roddy White, who had better stats on the same team, is a little ridiculous and Victor Cruz makes it in on name value. Having a down year, he ranks just 14th in the NFL in receiving yards. Someone like Vincent Jackson (4th) would have been more appropriate.

AFC Tight Ends: Rob Gronkowski, Heath Miller

No complaints.

NFC Tight Ends: Tony Gonzalez, Jason Witten

Martellus Bennett had a better overall year than Tony Gonzalez, but no one was a better pass catcher than Gonzalez, so I can’t argue too much. It’s worth noting that only one tight end graded out as a worse run blocker, however.

AFC Offensive Tackles: Joe Thomas, Duane Brown, Ryan Clady

My exact picks.

NFC Offensive Tackles: Joe Staley, Russell Okung, Trent Williams

Russell Okung makes it in because he’s known for not surrendering a single sack all year, but his 12 penalties are 2nd worst in the NFL. I don’t hate the pick, however.

AFC Guards: Logan Mankins, Marshal Yanda, Wade Smith

Mankins makes it in on name value, but he was just ProFootballFocus’ 22nd ranked guard this season and the fact that he missed 6 games with injury had a lot to do with it. Smith ranks 29th. I don’t really know where that came from. Andy Levitre, Kevin Zeitler, and even Jet Brandon Moore deserve it much more.

NFC Guards: Mike Iupati, Jahri Evans, Chris Snee

Iupati and Evans are definitely deserving, but Snee is another name value guy as ProFootballFocus’ 19th ranked guard. Meanwhile, Evan Mathis, who has been the top player at the position in each of the past 2 years, surrendering just 1 total sack, has never gotten a Pro-Bowl nod.

AFC Centers: Maurkice Pouncey, Chris Myers

Myers deserves it, but they’ve got the wrong Pouncey brother. Dolphin Mike graded out 5th at his position (tops in the AFC), while Maurkice ranked 14th, not bad, but not quite deserving. But how can you judge centers without stats?

NFC Centers: Max Unger, Jeff Saturday

Saturday is probably the most famous center in the NFL today, maybe all time, but in one of the funnier Pro-Bowl related developments of the year, the now 37-year-old was benched last week by the Packers, a week before being named a Pro-Bowler. Out of 37 eligible, Saturday was ProFootballFocus’ 30th rated player. Unger, 4th, is a much better selection, but there were 3 NFC centers, John Sullivan, Will Montgomery, and Brian La Puente, ahead of him.

AFC Defensive Ends: JJ Watt, Cameron Wake, Elvis Dumervil

Watt and Wake were obvious selections. I went with Derrick Morgan over Elvis Dumervil. Morgan has 7 sacks to Dumervil’s 12, but Morgan has significantly more combined hits and hurries (62 and 47) on fewer pass rush snaps. As a result, Morgan graded out 3rd in pass rush efficiency, while Dumervil graded out 9th. Dumervil was also a significantly worse player against the run and committed 7 penalties, ranking 39th among 4-3 defensive ends overall, while Morgan ranked 4th.

NFC Defensive Ends: Jason Pierre-Paul, Julius Peppers, Jared Allen

Three big name ends, JPP deserves it, the other two, slightly less so. Peppers and Allen ranked 13th and 17th among 4-3 ends in pass rush efficiency and didn’t offer much in the run game either, grading out 18th and 23th respectively overall. Another big name 4-3 end, John Abraham, graded 5th both in pass rush efficiency and overall. Two Panthers, Greg Hardy and Charles Johnson, were equally deserving, as was 3-4 end Calais Campbell, who was the NFC’s top 3-4 end. Also deserving, Brandon Graham, a situational end turned starter for the Eagles when Jason Babin was cut, who leads the NFL in pass rush efficiency and ranks 2nd among 4-3 ends.

AFC Defensive Tackles: Geno Atkins, Vince Wilfork, Haloti Ngata

Atkins is an obvious choice. Wilfork makes it in on name value, but there are far less one dimensional players out there, as good as he is against the run. Muhammad Wilkerson, technically a 3-4 end, but on the ballot as a tackle, is ProFootballFocus’ 2nd rated defensive lineman against the run, only behind Watt and actually significantly ahead of Wilfork in that aspect. Ngata, another guy who is technically a 3-4 end, is deserving, but Kyle Williams graded out 3rd among 4-3 tackles, while Ngata graded out 10th among 3-4 ends.

NFC Defensive Tackles: Justin Smith, Henry Melton, Gerald McCoy

Three very deserving choices, though I would have gone with Ndamukong Suh (4th) over Melton (6th), but that’s splitting hairs. A perfect example of how traditional stats are misleading, Suh, perceived to be having a down year, is actually having his year as a pro. His sack numbers are down, but his hits and hurries aren’t and he’s finally become a good run stopper and an all-around player.

AFC Outside Linebackers: Von Miller, Tamba Hali, Robert Mathis

Miller is an obvious choice. Hali should be replaced by teammate Justin Houston. The two actually had very similar raw pass rush numbers (10 sacks, 7 hits, and 27 hurries for Houston, 10, 7, and 26 for Hali), but Houston graded significantly out better in coverage and against the run. Houston dropped into coverage 164 times this year to Hali’s 75 and did a very good job of it and as a result, he saw fewer pass rush snaps and still outproduced Hali in the raw numbers. The total result: Houston ranked 3rd among 3-4 outside linebackers, while Hali ranked 16th.

Mathis is another name value guy, making it in with just 8 sacks, 5 hits, and 15 hurries, while struggling against the run and in coverage. He ranked 21st at his position overall. Deserving candidates include Miami 4-3 outside linebacker Nick Barnett (3rd at his position) and Baltimore 3-4 outside linebacker Paul Kruger (6th at his).

NFC Outside Linebackers: Aldon Smith, DeMarcus Ware, Clay Matthews

Smith and Matthews were obvious choices, though Smith is overrated (I’ll get into this when I do offseason awards in a few weeks) and Matthews had to save himself with 2 strong performances after returning from injury, as he missed 5 games. Ware, meanwhile, was outplayed by teammate Anthony Spencer, who graded out tops of 3-4 outside linebackers this year. Ware (8th) didn’t have a bad year, but Spencer graded out as the top run stopping linebacker overall not named Von Miller, did better in coverage, had 3 fewer penalties (Ware’s 9 lead the position) and had comparable pass rush production (11 sacks, 2 hits, and 25 hurries for Spencer, 14/12/30 for Ware). Only Clay Matthews and Aldon Smith graded out better than this position than Ware as pass rushers, while Spencer ranked 6th, but Spencer was the better overall linebacker.

AFC Middle Linebackers: Jerod Mayo, Derrick Johnson

My exact picks, but in the wrong order. Johnson doesn’t get his proper due on a 2-win Chiefs. There’s not a better middle linebacker in the league other than Patrick Willis and that’s not just this year.

NFC Middle Linebackers: Patrick Willis, NaVorro Bowman

Willis was obvious. His teammate Bowman was not, though not undeserving. Excluding Johnson (3rd), the NFC had the top-7 middle linebackers on ProFootballFocus this year (Mayo is technically an outside linebacker). Bowman was 7th, but still had a very good year. Divisional rivals Bobby Wagner (2nd) and Daryl Washington (4th), as well as rookie Luke Kuechly (5th), all graded out better than him. Even Sean Lee, who went down for the year week 7 graded 6th, which shows just how good he can be if he can return healthy and stay healthy.

AFC Cornerbacks: Champ Bailey, Johnathan Joseph, Antonio Cromartie

Champ Bailey and Antonio Cromartie are both deserving, though I only picked Cromartie (my other two picks were Alterraun Verner and Sheldon Brown, who have had shitty two week stretches since I wrote my picks). Both Bailey and Joseph were outranked by teammates Chris Harris and Kareem Jackson, who ranked 5th and 6th respectively. Bailey (11th) was still deserving. Joseph (51st) is one of the best cornerbacks in the league, when healthy, but he hasn’t been for most of this season. Brandon Flowers (7th) also doesn’t get his proper due on the Chiefs. It’s worth mentioning that the top-4 cornerbacks this year were all NFC cornerbacks.

NFC Cornerbacks: Charles Tillman, Tim Jennings, Patrick Peterson

Only one of those 4, only one was voted in, however, Tillman (3rd). Jennings (9th) wasn’t undeserving, but he’s the perfect example of how a player can have inconsistent interception totals and not have inconsistent years. Jennings ranked 15th in 2011, as one of two cornerbacks to not surrender a touchdown all season, but was unknown with 2 interceptions. This year, the league leader in interceptions makes the Pro-Bowl, even though injuries (he missed 2 games), should have kept him out in the loaded NFC.

Peterson makes it in on name value, but actually graded out 14th overall, which is so much better than 2011, when he ranked 102nd (rookie cornerbacks never do well). The other three of the top-4 cornerbacks who were kept out were, in order, Antoine Winfield, Richard Sherman, and Casey Hayward (the exception to that rookie cornerbacks rule). Hayward wasn’t on the ballot and Sherman may have been kept out by his impending potential suspension, but there’s no excuse for Winfield being left out. The 35-year-old had one of his best seasons this year and is a 3-time Pro Bowler on a playoff contending team.

AFC Free Safety: Ed Reed

Another name value guy, Reed (55th) has lost a couple steps, but no one has noticed yet. The AFC is loaded with free safeties as the top-3 safeties were all AFC free safeties, Eric Weddle (who has taken the top safety mantle from the aging Polamalu and Reed), Jairus Byrd (who is right behind Weddle), and Reshad Jones (a breakout star).

NFC Free Safeties: Dashon Goldson, Earl Thomas

The 4th rated was Kerry Rhodes and he didn’t make it either. Goldson (13th) wasn’t undeserving, however. A Pro-Bowl fraud in 2011, Goldson had an eye popping 7 interceptions, but was among the league leaders in receptions and yards surrendered and graded out 64th overall. This year, he had fewer interceptions (3), but played better football, particularly in coverage, where the 44.8 QB rating he allowed ranked 3rd in the NFL among starters, only behind Weddle and Byrd. Thomas (54th) is just overrated and doesn’t belong.

AFC Strong Safeties: Eric Berry, La’Ron Landry

Berry is making his 2nd Pro-Bowl and he didn’t deserve either of them. In 2010, he ranked 17th as a rookie, not bad, but not Pro-Bowl worthy. He made it anyway and looked it have a bright future either way, but he tore his ACL in 2011 and didn’t seem fully healthy this year and ranked 44th. On a 2-win Chiefs team that actually has some talented individual players on defense, it’s not right that Tamba Hali and Eric Berry would get in, but Justin Houston and Brandon Flowers would not.

Landry, meanwhile, was even worse at 55th. These are two former highly drafted safeties that never panned out (I haven’t given up on Berry though) that are still viewed as top tiered guys. There’s a reason no one wanted Landry when he hit the open market last offseason and had to settle for a 1 year deal. He’ll get a better one this offseason because he’s less of an injury risk, but he’s not a Pro-Bowler.

NFC Strong Safeties: Donte Whitner

Ugh. No. Like Earl Thomas, this is Pro-Bowl by association. The Seahawks and the 49ers both have excellent defenses, but that doesn’t mean every player on it is excellent. Whitner was less than pedestrian at 63rd and his deficiencies in coverage and have the 49ers considering taking him out in sub packages and making him a pure box safety.

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

Tennessee Titans at Green Bay Packers: Week 16 NFL Pick

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 16 NFL Picks, Packers, Titans

Tennessee Titans (5-9) at Green Bay Packers (10-4)

I’ve called Green Bay overrated because of all their injuries and I still think there’s a lot of truth to that. Injuries at running back have left them with a washed up Ryan Grant, an unproven DuJuan Harris, and fullback John Kuhn to carry the rock. The loss of Bryan Bulaga at right tackle has forced them to start undrafted rookie Don Barclay, who is really struggling. They’ve lost Jordy Nelson from their receiving corps, right as Greg Jennings returned, and Jennings has barely done anything since returning.

Defensively, they have lost linebackers Nick Perry and Desmond Bishop for the season. Perry’s absence, along with the lack of depth at rush linebacker and the ineptitude of their defensive line have left them with one viable pass rusher, Clay Matthews. Bishop’s replacement, DJ Smith, is also out for the season, leaving converted rush linebacker Brad Jones starting at inside linebacker. Charles Woodson also remains out.

The Packers were so good in 2010 despite injuries because they still had key defensive players healthy. Clay Matthews, Desmond Bishop, Cullen Jenkins, BJ Raji, Tramon Williams, Charles Woodson, and Nick Collins were all huge for them on the league’s 2nd ranked scoring defense. Bishop is out for the year and Woodson is out for at least the reminder of the regular season. Jenkins left as a free agent and Raji hasn’t been the same since 2010. Nick Collins had to retire because of injury, leaving Williams and now that he’s healthy Matthews as the only ones of those 7 healthy and playing near their respective 2010 levels this year. They’ve added some nice young players in the meantime, like Casey Hayward, but it’s not enough for them to be considered as good currently as they once were.

Last year, they were so good despite a rough defense because they dominated the turnover battle and scored 35.0 points per game. This year, thanks to injuries and the pure unsustainability of that 35.0 points per game figure, they are averaging just 24.6 points per game (Mason Crosby isn’t helping matters). That’s good, but a far cry from last season. They didn’t come into this season with the goal of being the league’s #13 scoring offense. Meanwhile, their turnover differential is down from +24 to +6. All of this has combined to expose a vulnerable and now injury riddled defense.

As a result, they aren’t playing like the Packers of 2010 and 2011.  Their impressive wins collection is scarce and includes a blowout in Houston, two wins over the Bears, a home win over the Vikings, and a 14 point win at home over the Cardinals. In their other 10 games, they don’t have a single double digit win despite playing Detroit (twice), St. Louis, and Jacksonville. However, in spite of that, the odds makers can boost the spread on name value and know everyone will keep betting, as is the case this week as the Packers are a heavy public lean. I love fading the public because they always lose money in the long run.

Given that the Packers have a real lack of blowout wins this season, I’m instantly drawn to the 12.5 points with Tennessee. The problem is that Tennessee has had no shortage of blowout losses. They’ve lost 5 games by 21 or more and 6 of their 9 losses by come by 14 or more. As a result, even with the Packers’ lack of blowout wins, we’re not really getting any line value here.

The Titans rank 29th in net points per drive at -0.65, while the Packers rank 10th at 0.23. If you take the difference, multiply by 11 (the average numbers of drives per team per game), and add 2.5 for home field, you get that the Packers should be favored by 12, which is right where this line is. DVOA actually suggests that the Packers might be getting some line value here, as they rank 5th in weighted and regular DVOA, while the Titans rank 28th and 29th respectively.

I’m still going with the Titans for several reasons, however. The Packers’ lack of blowout wins is obviously one of them and in spite of the Titans’ large list of blowout losses, only one (a 14 point loss to the Texans) has come since a weird week 9 game in which the Bears took a 28-2 lead almost solely off special teams and returns. Before that, their last one was week 5.

They really got out of the gate horribly, with 4 losses of 21+ in their first 5 games, but since then, their young defense has settled down, allowing 25.0 points per game, 21.8 per game, if you exclude that weird Chicago game which wasn’t really their defense’s fault. They’ve finally started playing like I thought they would before the season, coming off a year in which they actually ranked 8th in the NFL in scoring defense.

The second reason is that there are several prominent trends on Tennessee’s side. Dogs are 108-67 ATS before being favorites since 2011 and the Titans just face the Jaguars next week. Going off that, non-conference dogs are 69-44 ATS before being divisional favorites since 2002. Meanwhile, Teams are 32-11 ATS as non-divisional double digit dogs before being divisional favorites since 1989. If you combine the last two trends, you get that non-conference double digit dogs are 11-5 ATS before being divisional favorites since 1989.

That makes a lot of sense. This is Tennessee’s Super Bowl. All they have left on their schedule is the crappy Jaguars. There are no distractions for them and they’ll be able to give the Packers their all. Green Bay, meanwhile, obviously needs a win here to remain in the hunt for a first round bye, but they don’t need to blow the Titans out and they might not give 100% effort for some 5-9 AFC team, especially with a divisional contest next on the horizon as they face the Vikings next week. Worst case scenario, I like my chances of getting a backdoor cover here or of covering because Mason Crosby left some points on the field for the Packers. It’s not a significant play, but the Titans should be the right side.

Public lean: Green Bay (80% range)

Sharps lean: GB 11 TEN 4

Final thoughts: Late reverse line movement has driven this down to -11, so sharps in general are probably on the Titans. I’m sticking at 2, however.

Green Bay Packers 27 Tennessee Titans 17

Pick against spread: Tennessee +12.5 (-110) 2 units

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

Minnesota Vikings at Houston Texans: Week 16 NFL Pick

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 16 NFL Picks, Texans, Vikings

Minnesota Vikings (8-6) at Houston Texans (12-2)

The Vikings kept their playoff hopes alive last week, as they are one of many 8-6 teams in the NFC. They are long shot hopes, however. Not only do they not control their own destiny, their final 2 games are against Houston and Green Bay, two of the better teams in the NFL. Making matters worse, the Vikings are in a bad spot trends wise here.

Teams are 45-19 ATS since 2008 as non-divisional home favorites before being divisional road favorites since 2008. The Texans have no distractions on the horizon and teams generally cover in this situation. Going off that, non-conference home favorites are 37-18 ATS before being divisional road favorites since 2002. The Vikings, meanwhile, have a distraction next week, as they have that aforementioned Green Bay game. Non-divisional road dogs are 47-72 ATS since 2002 before being divisional road dogs.

The Vikings also struggle mightily on the road, winning just 2 of 7 games on the road. Those games were in Detroit and St. Louis respectively, so it’s not like they were beating up on some of the elite teams in the NFL, like the Texans are. Those also happen to be the only two road games they’ve covered in this season. For comparison, they are 6-1 (5-1-1 ATS) at home.

I also feel like they’re a little overrated. Everyone wants to talk about Adrian Peterson, but their passing offense is miserable. This is still a passing league, you have to be able to pass, especially against a team like Houston. As evidence of this, they are 2-4 this year when Ponder completes 60% or fewer of his passes and 4-2 when Adrian Peterson rushes for 5.0 yards per carry or less. However, because of Peterson, we’re able to actually get line value here with Houston and not have Houston be a heavy publicly backed favorite.

Houston ranks 6th in net points per drive at 0.56, while Minnesota ranks 19th at -0.07. If you take the difference, multiply by 11 (the average amount of drives per game), and add 2.5 points for home field, you get that Houston should be favored by 9, not huge line value, but significant enough when combined with all the aforementioned trends, especially with the public not on Houston heavily. DVOA supports this -9 calculated line, as Houston ranks 8th and 10th in regular and weighted DVOA respectively, while Minnesota ranks 20th and 23rd respectively.

The AFC, the weaker conference, is 6-15 ATS as favorites against the NFC this year, which is part of why this isn’t a significant play. The other reason is just my hatred of laying more than a touchdown. The Texans should be the right side, however, and get another convincing win here. The Texans have 7 wins by 8 or more, while the Vikings have 5 such losses.

Public lean: Houston (50% range)

Sharps lean: MIN 13 HOU 6

Final thoughts: No change.

Houston Texans 24 Minnesota Vikings 13

Pick against spread: Houston -7.5 (-110) 2 units

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

Washington Redskins at Philadelphia Eagles: Week 16 NFL Pick

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 16 NFL Picks, Commanders, Eagles

Washington Redskins (8-6) at Philadelphia Eagles (4-10)

Some situational trends say that the Redskins are the right side here. Teams are 35-19 ATS as divisional road favorites before being divisional home favorites since 2002. Meanwhile, on the Eagles side, divisional home dogs are 23-38 ATS before being divisional road dogs since 2002. That being said, I feel like this is too many points for me to feel comfortable, especially with the public all over Washington.

There was no early line last week because of Griffin’s questionable status, so there’s no way to know if this is an overreaction line, but Cincinnati was just -4 in Philadelphia last week. The Bengals have the same record as the Redskins and won the head to head matchup in Cincinnati. I know the Bengals won by 21, but they actually trailed by 3 in the 3rd quarter before a ridiculous 4 turnover in 5 plays stretch by the Eagles, though I guess that’s just what the Eagles do. Again, the Redskins should be the right side, but this is way too many points on the road for me to be comfortable. We might have gotten a little carried away with the Redskins and because of that, the odds makers can boost the spread and know people will still take them, as has been the case.

Using net points per drive, we see that we do have significant line value with the Eagles. The Redskins rank 14th in net points per drive at 0.08, while the Eagles rank 27th at -0.47. If you take the difference, multiply by 11 (the average amount of drives per game per team), and add 2.5 points to Philadelphia’s side for home field advantage, you get that Washington should be favored by just 3.5 points. DVOA supports this, but only somewhat as the Redskins and Eagles rank 11th and 27th respectively in DVOA, but 9th and 29th respectively in weighted DVOA. Washington is the pick, but it’s not a big play.

Public lean: Washington (80% range)

Sharps lean: WAS 22 PHI 8

Final thoughts: I guess I can put one more unit on Washington, though this is at -5.5 in the Supercontest. I wouldn’t go over a touchdown.

Washington Redskins 27 Philadelphia Eagles 16

Pick against spread: Washington -6 (-110) 2 units

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

San Diego Chargers at New York Jets: Week 16 NFL Pick

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 16 NFL Picks, Chargers, Jets

San Diego Chargers (5-9) at New York Jets (6-8)

Ugh. How am I supposed to pick between these two teams? The Chargers have been incredibly inconsistent and the Jets are a mediocre at best team who has just been eliminated from the playoff race making a controversial move to start a former 7th round pick who has never made an NFL start. There’s a lot of conflicting stuff on both sides.

For the Jets, they’ve beaten almost every mediocre or worse team they’ve played this season and the Chargers certainly qualify. They’re 0-6 against the likes of New England (twice), Seattle, Pittsburgh, Houston, and San Francisco, but 6-2 in their other 8 games, beating Buffalo, Indianapolis, Miami, Arizona, St. Louis, and Jacksonville. Their only two losses against mediocre or worse teams were last week in Tennessee in a 5 turnover shit show and in a rematch game against the Dolphins.

Speaking of that 5 turnover shit show, Greg McElroy should be an upgrade over Mark Sanchez, but do we really know? I normally hate picking games featuring quarterbacks making their first NFL start and this is no different. I have no idea what to expect from McElroy and furthermore, I have no idea what to expect from the rest of the team. What if they just completely quit now that their season is over and their quarterback has been benched?

For the Chargers, they’re actually in a great spot as dogs before being favorites when their opponent will next be dogs. The Jets go to Buffalo next week, while the Chargers just host the Raiders. Teams are 118-61 ATS in this spot since 2008. The Chargers are also typically a good December team. They’re 22-11 ATS in week 14 or later in the Philip Rivers era, including 9-2 ATS as dogs.

We’re also getting line value with them as they rank 22nd in net points per drive at -0.23, while the Jets rank 25th at -0.38. If you take the difference, multiply by 11 (the average amount of drives per game), and add 2.5 points for home field, you get that the Jets should be only favored by 1. However, DVOA only backs this up somewhat as the Chargers rank 23rd in regular and 24th in weighted, while the Jets rank 24th and 25th respectively and it’s not really enough to make any pick off that.

Besides, the Chargers have also fallen flat in a bunch of games where the trends favored them. The last time they covered as anything other than touchdown plus dogs was way back in week 9 and the time before that was way back in week 4, both instances against the crappy Chiefs. They somehow pulled off a huge upset in Pittsburgh a few weeks ago, but that was when they were touchdown plus dogs and nothing at all was expected of them.

They followed that up by falling completely flat at home last week as favorites, even though it was December. Maybe here as December dogs, it’ll be different, but I don’t know. They already know their Head Coach and GM are getting fired at the end of the season. They reacted well to that news in their first game after the news broke, beating Pittsburgh, but then there was last week. What if they’ve completely quit?

They’re also 2-9 ATS as non-divisional dogs in the last 2 seasons and they are a West Coast team playing at 1 PM on the East Coast here, a situation teams generally don’t cover in. I’m going to just fade the heavy public underdog here and take the Jets and hope that the Chargers have quit and the Jets haven’t, that a quarterback change and bottoming out was good for them, but this would rank last in any confidence pools. If you actually make a play on this game, you have a problem.

Public lean: San Diego (80% range)

Sharps lean: SD 5 NYJ 2

Final thoughts: 7 people are crazy.

New York Jets 17 San Diego Chargers 13

Pick against spread: NY Jets -2.5 (-110) 1 unit

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

Cleveland Browns at Denver Broncos: Week 16 NFL Pick

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 16 NFL Picks, Broncos, Browns

Cleveland Browns (5-9) at Denver Broncos (11-3)

Before last week, the Browns hadn’t really gotten blown out all year. They had been competitive in every other game. They only have 3 other losses by more than a touchdown. One of those, a 14 point loss in New York against the Giants, was a lot closer than the final score as the Browns actually led 14-0 early. In another one, a 25-15 loss against the Ravens, they actually scored more frequently than the Ravens, but they had 5 field goals to 3 touchdowns and a field goal for the Ravens. Only a 10 point loss to the Bills week 3 was a game they weren’t really competitive in before last week.

I don’t know what happened last week, but maybe they just were completely unprepared for Kirk Cousins and overlooking him, expecting an easy 4th win in a row with Robert Griffin hurt, and they were completely caught off guard. This is still a team that plays a lot of close games. Their points differential is just -30 at 5-9 and they rank 20th in net points per drive at -0.11. Last year, they lost just 3 of their 12 games by more than 11 points and in 2010, they had just 2 such losses. The Browns are 5-2 ATS as double digit dogs since 2010, as they’ve had the most losses by a touchdown or less in the NFL over that time period. They’re actually 8-5-1 ATS on the season this year.

However, that doesn’t necessarily mean they won’t get blown out by the Broncos, who have 6 wins this year by 12 or more, which is where this line is at. As a result, they rank 5th in net points per drive at 0.67. As a result of this, we’re not actually getting much line value with the Browns, even though they have played a lot of close games. If we take the difference, multiply by 11 (the average amount of drives per team per game) and add 2.5 for home field, we get that Denver should be favored by 11, which isn’t much of a difference. DVOA somewhat reinforces this as the Broncos rank 3rd in both regular and weighted, while the Browns rank 25th in regular, though 19th in weighted.

On top of that, the Broncos are touchdown plus favorites before being touchdown plus favorites when their opponent will next be touchdown plus dogs. Teams are 100-59 ATS in this spot since 1989, though just 16-13 ATS when both teams have a divisional game next. That trend overall is actually just 34-27 ATS since 2002. I am also worried about the loss of TJ Ward on Cleveland’s defense, but if I had to pick a side, I’d go with Cleveland to play another close game. There might also be some backdoor cover potential here. It’s not a significant play though.

Public lean: Denver (50% range)

Sharps lean: CLE 19 DEN 2

Final thoughts: The sharps love the Browns more than anyone this week. We also have reverse line action. I’m boosting this to 3 units.

Denver Broncos 24 Cleveland Browns 16

Pick against spread: Cleveland +11 (-110) 3 units

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

Chicago Bears at Arizona Cardinals: Week 16 NFL Pick

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 16 NFL Picks, Bears, Cardinals

Chicago Bears (8-6) at Arizona Cardinals (5-9)

The Bears started the season 7-1 and looked primed for a first round bye, but now stand at 8-6 and need help to even get into the playoffs. How did this happen? Well, the simple answer is that they started playing tougher competition. In their first 8 games, they faced Indianapolis, Green Bay, St. Louis, Dallas, Jacksonville, Detroit, Carolina, and Tennessee, but in their last 6, they’ve faced Houston, San Francisco, Minnesota, Seattle, Minnesota again and last week the Packers.

The Bears have won every game this year in which they’ve been favored by more than 4 (going 7-0 SU and 5-1-1 ATS), but in their other 7 games, they’ve won just once, in Dallas, going 1-6 SU and ATS. Fortunately for them, they close out the season with two easier games, in Arizona and in Detroit and they should be able to take care of their business, but they need the Giants to lose at least once to get into the playoffs.

In their 7 games in which they’ve been favored by 4 or more, they’ve won 41-21, 23-6, 41-3, 13-7, 23-22, 51-20, and 28-10, winning by an average of 18.7 points per game. 5 of those 7 wins were by 18 or more and only the game against Carolina was actually close. They shut out the Lions were 59 ½ minutes before they got a backdoor touchdown to push and finish 13-7. They should get a 5th huge blowout win here against a crappy opponent. The other recent for their recent struggles have been defensive injuries, with Henry Melton, Brian Urlacher, and Tim Jennings out, but I don’t know how much that matters against Arizona.

We’re getting minimal line value with the Cardinals, as the Bears rank 9th in net points per drive at 0.31, while the Cardinals rank 23rd at -0.31. If you take the difference, multiply by 11 (the average amount of drives per game per team), and add 2.5 points to Arizona’s side, you get that Chicago should be favored by 4.5 instead of 6. However, that’s pretty minimal and can be nullified by DVOA, which takes into account things like schedule. Chicago ranks 6th in both regular and weighted DVOA, while the Cardinals rank 26th and 27th respectively. They were on a 9 game losing streak before their win last week, in which they still got outgained by over 100 yards.

The Bears are also in a good spot as favorites before being favorites when their opponents will next be dogs. Teams are 93-66 ATS in this spot since 2011. Since 2002, teams are 89-54 ATS in that spot when both teams have a divisional game next on the schedule. The Bears don’t have a tough game left on their schedule, as they finish in Detroit next week, while the Cardinals have a game that will be much more important to them in San Francisco next week. Teams are 43-85 ATS before being double digit divisional dogs since 2002. They might not be totally focused for the Bears here, especially off a big win against the Lions and whenever a dog might not be totally focused, it’s normally bad news. The only reason this isn’t a bigger play is because Chicago is heavily publicly backed and the public always loses money in the long run.

Public lean: Chicago (80% range)

Sharps lean: CHI 12 ARI 4

Final thoughts: Debated going up to 3 units, but it’s at -5.5 in the Supercontest. I can’t do a significant play at -6. I like it a lot more on the other side of that key number.

Chicago Bears 27 Arizona Cardinals 6

Pick against spread: Chicago -6 (-110) 2 units

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

Atlanta Falcons at Detroit Lions: Week 16 NFL Pick

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 16 NFL Picks, Falcons, Lions

Atlanta Falcons (12-2) Detroit Lions (4-10)

Normally I like going against huge line movements because I hate week to week overreactions. This line was Atlanta -1 last week and now it’s at -4.5, skipping over two key numbers of 3 and 4. At first glance, this appears warranted. The Lions got blown out by the crappy Cardinals in Arizona, losing 38-10, while the Falcons got a huge home win over the solid Giants, winning 34-0. However, it’s important to think about what those games really mean.

Atlanta definitely proved they can turn it on and not just compete with some of the better teams in the league, but win convincingly, something they hadn’t done all year. There were a lot of reasonable concerns about how their long list of less than convincing victories against mediocre teams would translate into games against tougher opponents, which they really hadn’t had a lot of (Denver way back in week 2 when Peyton Manning wasn’t Peyton Manning yet is the only projected playoff team they’ve played this year, besides the Giants).

However, that long list still exists. They beat Carolina by 2 and then lost the rematch in Carolina by 10 in a game that wasn’t as close as the final score. They beat Tampa Bay by just 1, Oakland by just 3, Arizona by just 4, Dallas by just 6, and then lost in New Orleans. They won the rematch with the Saints by 10 in a game that was closer than the final score and before the Giants’ game, that was probably their most impressive win.

Just because the Falcons blew out the Giants, doesn’t mean they’ll stop playing down to the level of their competition against mediocre opponents, like these Lions. In fact, I think it makes it more likely. After their big Thursday Night win over the Saints, the Falcons had their worst game of the season the following week in Carolina.

For that reason, I like getting the 4.5 points with them. Detroit has a terrible record, but they’ve played a lot of good teams close. They’re like the anti-Falcons in a way. They always play superior teams close, but can’t get it done. Only 2 of their 10 losses have been by more than 8, including 4 losses by 4 or fewer points. I’m expecting more of the same when these two teams get together, a close game in which the Falcons find a way to win and the Lions find a way to lose.

As a result of the Lions’ long list of close wins and the ridiculous 10 return touchdowns that have gone against them this season, the Lions actually rank 15th in net points per drive at -0.02. The Falcons do rank 4th at 0.71 and if you take the difference between those, multiply by 11 (the average amount of drives per team per game), and add 2.5 points to Detroit’s side for home field, you get that Atlanta should be -5.5, so we’re still getting line value with the Falcons, in spite of the huge line movement, at least at first glance.

However, if we look at DVOA, which takes things like schedule into account, we see that Atlanta ranks 9th in regular and 12th in weighted, while the Lions rank 14th and 16th respectively. That defeats any line value that we might have been getting with the Falcons and I think we’re actually getting line value with the Lions thanks to that huge line movement.

Going back to the events of last week that caused that huge line movement, I think the Lions just completely overlooked the Cardinals, who were on a 9 game losing streak and had previously gotten blown out by 58-0. They still outgained the Cardinals 312-196, but lost because of 2 return touchdowns and a special teams fumble deep in their own territory. I think it was a bit of a fluke, because, as I mentioned, previously they had only lost 1 game by more than 8 all season, including none by more than 10.

That big loss actually makes it more likely they cover this week, as, like the Cardinals last week, they’re the ones coming off the embarrassing game. Dogs are 89-57 ATS off a 28+ point loss, including 29-13 ATS off an ATS loss of 31+. Teams tend to be overlooked, embarrassed, and undervalued in this spot. They’re certainly undervalued after that huge line movement with the public still all over the Falcons. I like to fade the public because they always lose money in the long run. I think the Lions will also be embarrassed, especially at home on national television, and they’ll probably be overlooked too.

I say probably because this is a nationally televised game, so the Falcons might be more focused than they otherwise would be, but then again, they barely beat Dallas on national television earlier this year. Still, that is the first reason why this isn’t a significant play. The 2nd is that the Lions are in a bad spot as home dogs before being home dogs when their opponent will next be home favorites. Teams are 25-55 ATS in this spot since 2002. However, the Lions should still be the right side as I’m expecting a close game.

Public lean: Atlanta (80% range)

Sharps lean: DET 13 ATL 10

Final thoughts: No change.

Atlanta Falcons 27 Detroit Lions 24

Pick against spread: Detroit +4.5 (-110) 2 units

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

New York Giants at Baltimore Ravens: Week 16 NFL Pick

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 16 NFL Picks, Giants, Ravens

New York Giants (8-6) at Baltimore Ravens (9-5)

The Giants stunk it up last week in Atlanta, getting shut out, losing 34-0. I generally like taking teams off a blowout loss. Teams in this situation tend to be overlooked, undervalued, and embarrassed. The most recent case of this was the Cardinals’ blowing out the Lions as huge home dogs last week after that 52-0 loss in Arizona the week before. I was especially looking forward to doing this with the Giants, a team that tends to have their best games when nobody believes in them.

However, I only like doing this when the team is a dog. Here as a favorite, it’s a different dynamic for the Giants. They’re supposed to bounce back and win. They’re not going to be overlooked and they certainly aren’t undervalued, especially as publicly backed favorites and anyone who reads these picks frequently knows I love to fade the public because they always lose money in the long run.

I really wish that the Giants were dogs here. Not only do they always thrive when people doubt them and not only do dogs tend to cover off a blowout loss, but road dogs off a road loss also tend to cover, going 86-51 ATS since 2008. However, with Baltimore in freefall after their 3rd straight loss, that couldn’t happen here. This line opened at even and now it’s moved to the point where the Giants are actually favored by 2.5 and not just favored, but heavily publicly backed favorites.

Given that, I actually like the Ravens here a little bit, albeit in a game that’s a bit of a tossup for me. Not only do I love to fade the public, as the public always loses money in the long run, but the Giants frequently fall flat when they’re expected to win and with the Ravens in freefall even more than they are, that’s the case here. Instead, it’s the Ravens who are the doubted ones and I like their chances of avoiding their first 4-game losing streak in the Joe Flacco/John Harbaugh era. Harbaugh is 6-1 ATS off of a double digit loss.

Besides, every year in the Tom Coughlin era, the Giants have a 2nd half slide. Since he took over in 2004, they are 53-19 in the first 8 games of the season and 29-41 in the second 8 games of the season. This year has been no different as they started 6-2, but thanks to a 2-4 stretch, they are now 8-6, not bad, but not as good as it once looked.

It’s not all Eli Manning’s fault, but there is a noticeable dip in his 2nd half production as compared to his 1st half production. He completes 57% of his passes for an average of 6.7 YPA and 94 touchdowns to 83 interceptions in the 2nd half, as opposed to 60% of his passes for an average of 7.4 YPA and 111 touchdowns to 61 interceptions in the first half.

Net points per drive also says this game is a bit of a tossup and that we’re getting line value with the Ravens now for that reason. The Ravens are 11th in net points per drive at 0.21, while the Giants rank 8th at 0.42. If you take the difference, multiply by 11 (the average amount of drives per game per team), and add 2.5 points for home field, you get that this line should be a true pick em. DVOA supports this as the Giants rank 7th in regular DVOA and 8th in weighted, while the Ravens rank 10th and 13th respectively.

It’s definitely not a huge play, but I like the Ravens more than I like the Giants this week, though I’d rather have the Ravens +120 on the money line than anything spread wise because this game is a real tossup. On one hand, the Giants frequently collapse in the 2nd half and frequently struggle in games they’re supposed to win, while the Ravens are the doubted ones attempting to avoid their first 4 game losing streak in 5 seasons.

On the other hand, the Giants do well on the road under Tom Coughlin (50-28 ATS, including 24-16 ATS in the 2nd half of the season). This is also a bigger game for the Giants than the Ravens, as they are fighting for the playoffs and I do like Eli Manning in big games. The Ravens clinch the division before this game even starts if the Steelers beat the Bengals, which I think will happen, though I do expect them to still give 100% with a huge need for momentum before the playoffs. Obviously, you don’t want to go into the playoffs on a 5 game losing streak. There was also a point when the Ravens won 16 straight at home, though they’ve now lost 2 straight and that 16 game stretch featured few blowouts and a weak schedule. Rank this one near the bottom in confidence pools, but the Ravens are the pick.

Public lean: NY Giants (80% range)

Sharps lean: NYG 24 BAL 6

Final thoughts: I’m still uncertain. I thought about switching my uncertainty to the other side, but I still like +120 more than anything. The Giants frequently disappointed when they’re expected to win, especially in the 2nd half of the season.

Baltimore Ravens 24 New York Giants 23 Upset Pick +120

Pick against spread: Baltimore +2.5 (-110) 0 units

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

San Francisco 49ers at Seattle Seahawks: Week 16 NFL Pick

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 16 NFL Picks, 49ers, Seahawks

San Francisco 49ers (10-3-1) at Seattle Seahawks (9-5)

Everyone knows about the Seahawks’ home prowess, but it’s really, really significant, possibly even more than people realize. At home, they are 46-20 ATS since 2005, including 16-8 ATS as home dogs. They’ve already knocked off the Cowboys, Packers, and Patriots as home dogs this season, en route to a 7-0 SU and ATS home record. For contrast, they are 24-43 ATS on the road since 2005.

On average, they outscore opponents at home by an average of 6.9 points per game. This is against an average line of -2.6, which is right around the standard adjustment for home field advantage. As a result, they outscore opponents against the spread by an average of 4.3 points per game. For this reason, I don’t feel that using 2.5 as a home field adjustment for them is appropriate. I feel that using 6.9 or something around there is a more appropriate adjustment, possibly even more based on how well they’ve done this year (outscoring opponents against the spread by 16.9 points per game).

We’re getting line value even using the standard 2.5 point adjustment. The Seahawks rank 3rd in net points per drive at 0.77, right behind the 49ers, who are 2nd at 0.90. If you take the difference, multiply by 11 (the average amount of drives per game), and add 2.5 points for home field, we get that Seattle should be favored by 1 point. If we use a more appropriate number for home field, no matter what it is, we’re getting significant line value. Using 6, the line should be Seattle -4.5 and using 6.9, the line should be Seattle -5.5. And that’s not even taking into account that the Seahawks actually rank better in DVOA and weighted DVOA, ranking 2nd in both, while the 49ers rank 4th.

Besides, the 49ers haven’t won more than 2 games in a row all season. They started the season with wins against the Packers and Lions and were anointed the NFL’s best and then they lost in Minnesota. They followed up with blowout wins against the Jets and Bills and then people were back on their bandwagon, before they then got blown out by the Giants at home. They followed that up with divisional wins against the Seahawks and Cardinals before tying the Rams at home. After that, they blew out the Bears and Saints in consecutive weeks, before losing to those same Rams again. Now they’re on a two game winning streak against the Dolphins and Patriots and have once again been anointed the NFL’s top team. I don’t know if they’ll be able to handle that.

This is a much bigger game for the Seahawks. The 49ers just need one more win to win the division and can get the job done next week against Cardinals. Obviously, they still want to win out and get the first round bye, but they can relax a little bit and they might be without one of their top defensive players, Justin Smith. They’ve already gotten their huge win. Now the Seahawks are looking to do the same. It’s kind of like when the 49ers knocked off the Patriots last week after the Patriots had just got a huge win against the Texans. Now it’s the Seahawks’ turn and I think they’ll get the job done, especially at home in a nationally televised game.

It’s a significant play even though the Seahawks are coming off two straight blowout wins and teams are 4-10 ATS since 1989 off of back-to-back wins by 31 or more and 27-42 ATS off of back-to-back wins by 24 or more. The 49ers fell flat in this spot against the Giants earlier this year, but it’s a different dynamic here for the Seahawks as dogs and I’m not going against them at home.

Rather than putting 1 unit on the money line and 3 on the spread, I’m putting all 5 on the money line. Since 1989, there have been 422 teams who have been favorites of less than 2. Of those 422 teams, only 8 of those teams lost by exactly 1 point, about 1.9%. I still say that was the smart move after some thought and I’m going to do that again here. It’s not worth the extra 15 cents on the dollar for something that will hurt me about 2% of the time.

Public lean: Seattle (50% range)

Sharps lean: SF 16 SEA 15

Final thoughts: Justin Smith is out and the line moved to Seattle -1. I really like Seattle’s chances of winning straight up at home, especially with Smith out, so I’ll add one unit on the spread at -1 (-110) to go with 4 units on the money line at +105. The Patriots’ offensive explosion against the 49ers last week came when Smith left the game. Aldon Smith puts up the numbers, but Justin is their most irreplaceable defensive player.

Seattle Seahawks 17 San Francisco 49ers 13 Upset Pick +105 4 units

Pick against spread: Seattle -1 (-110) 1 unit

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]