2012 NFL Picks

Tampa Bay Buccaneers at Minnesota Vikings: Week 8 NFL Pick

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 8 NFL Picks, Buccaneers, Vikings

Tampa Bay Buccaneers (2-4) at Minnesota Vikings (5-2)

As I like to mention every week, the rule of thumb on Thursday Night is to take the home team. Home teams are 68-49 ATS in the history of Thursday Night football. It makes sense. On a short week, all the time to prepare, practice, and rest is incredibly valuable and when you have to travel on a short week, that takes away some of that time and puts you at an obvious disadvantage.

As I often point out, however, this effect is usually nullified when the road team is a favorite. Road favorites generally tend to be more veteran, experienced teams and more veteran, experienced teams also tend to have an advantage in preparation on a short week, for obvious reasons. This effect tends to nullify the effect of having to travel for road favorites. As a result, road favorites are 23-22 ATS in the history of Thursday Night Football. What this does do is give us an even stronger trend with home favorites. Home favorites are 45-26 ATS on Thursday Night.

The one exception to that tends to be divisional home favorites. This also makes some sense. Part of the reason why travelling on a short week hurts you is because it cuts into your time to prepare for the opposing team. Well, if the opposing team is a familiar division foe, this doesn’t have as much of an effect. Divisional home favorites are just 17-16 ATS on Thursdays and divisional road favorites are 8-10 ATS.

This week, we are getting a non-divisional home favorite on Thursday Night, which happens to be the strongest trend of all. You’re the better team. Your opponent has to travel. And your opponent is unfamiliar with you and doesn’t have as much time to prepare for you as you have to prepare for them. Teams in this spot are 28-10 ATS in the history of Thursday Night Football.

However, I’m not as excited to be able to use this trend as I thought it would be. The issue is that Minnesota, while they are home favorites, is also a young team. Both of these teams are young. Given that I believe the advantage favorites have on Thursday Nights stems from them being experienced and veteran and more prepared to deal with a short week, it hurts that Minnesota is a young team. We don’t really know how they’ll react to a short week, even against an equally young opponent.

Minnesota is, in fact, the better team here, so this line of -6.5 is reasonable. Actually, it’s kind of eerie how reasonable it is. I use two methods of determining line value. I use yards per play differential (yards per play minus yards per play allowed) and rate of sustaining drives differential (how often on any given set of downs you achieve a first down or a score minus how often you opponent does so).

I think these two work together well. Yards per play differential overvalues teams that get a lot of big plays, but can’t sustain drives and undervalues methodical offenses (and vice versa for the defense), while the rate of sustaining drives metric overvalues teams that are the exact opposite, methodical, but lack explosion.

Minnesota’s yards per play differential is 0.4, while Tampa Bay’s is -0.2. That translates to a “real” line of -7 (take the difference between the two differentials, divide by .15 and add 3 for homefield). Meanwhile, Minnesota’s rate of sustaining drives differential is 2.8%, while Tampa Bay’s is -2.0%. Take the difference, divide this time by 1.5, and add 3 for homefield, and you get a real line of -6. Average those two and you get -6.5, so there’s not really any line value either way. If there is one way, it’s towards Minnesota slightly, because Tampa Bay is missing arguably their top pass rusher Adrian Clayborn and their top cornerback Aqib Talib, while Minnesota isn’t missing anyone of note.

Two other things work against Tampa Bay. One is how close and down to the wire their game was last week. They didn’t go to overtime with the Saints, but they almost did. Teams are 3-14 ATS on Thursdays after an overtime game. Part of that is being exhausted from playing an extra period and then having to play again in 3 days, but some of that is the mental exhaustion of playing such a close game. The physical exhaustion won’t be as big of an issue this week because it didn’t actually go to overtime, but they could be in a bad spot mentally off such a close loss to a divisional opponent.

The other is just the rate of which underdogs have been covering this year. Dogs are 63-39 ATS on the season. You might think, that’s a reason to take the dog, but eventually that’s going to even out. Dating back over the last decade, dogs or favorites have not finished more than 10 games over .500 over the course of an entire year. It’s smart to ride the correction going forward and take more favorites than dogs, particularly favorites that are not publicly backed because those teams covering would have a double benefit for odds makers. It would allow the dogs/favorites disparity to even out and also they’d make money. In this one, there’s not a significant public lean either way and I think you’d have to be crazy this week to take a public dog (with one possible exception, which I’ll get into later this week).

I tried to pick as many favorites as I could last week. I just didn’t like a lot of them. This week, I do like a lot more, so I’ll pick more favorites this week, starting with this game, even if it isn’t a big play. Last week, favorites were 7-6 ATS, which looks like the start of a correction. It might not look like it totally, but remember, favorites were 12-1 SU. 5 of those covers were backdoor, including two ridiculous ones: Jim Harbaugh’s declining a safety on Thursday Night and the Lions driving for a backdoor cover with 30 seconds left on Monday Night against a 6.5 point spread when they hadn’t scored all night (both went against me on two instances I actually did pick favorites).

I’m afraid to put more than 2 units on Minnesota because they are young, but Minnesota should be the right side. I also, as always, like the under on Thursday Night. Unprepared teams, which teams who play on Thursday Night are, tend to see the negative effects more offensively than defensively. The under is 51-70 on Thursday Night all time. I especially like the under this week because both teams are young.

Public lean: Minnesota (new thing I’m adding, siding with the odds makers on bets is not a bad thing to do since they make so much money, so I’m listing this here to allow readers to “fade” the public, if they so choose, in this example, the odds makers win if Tampa Bay covers)

Minnesota Vikings 23 Tampa Bay Buccaneers 13

Pick against spread: Minnesota -6.5 (-110) 2 units

Total: Under 42.5 (-110) 1 unit

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

Week 7 NFL Picks Results

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 8 NFL Picks

Week 7 Results

ATS: 5-6-2 -2 units/-$340

SU: 9-4

Upset Picks: 1-4 -235

Over/Under: 1-0 +100

Parlays: 1-0 +100

Total: -$375

Public Results ATS*: 5-7-1 +5 units

2012 results to date

ATS: 50-49-5 +11 units/-$125

SU: 63-41

Upset Picks: 19-21 +$1050

Over/Under: 4-1-1 +290

Parlays: 1-0 +100

Total: +1315

Survivor: 5-2 (HOU, NE, NO, BAL, SF, ATL, CHI)

Public Results ATS*: 45-57-2 -30 units

*I’m doing this to see how the general public does. Based on percent of bets on each team, if the more popularly bet team covers, it’s a public win, if not, it’s a public loss. If a team that has 50-59% of the action on it covers, the public gets “one unit,” if they don’t cover, they lose one unit, 60-69% is 2, 70-79% is 3, etc.

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

Detroit Lions at Chicago Bears: Week 7 NFL Pick

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 7 NFL Picks, Bears, Lions

Detroit Lions (2-3) at Chicago Bears (4-1)

This week, I put the Bears 1st in my Power Rankings. With the exception of the Thursday Night loss to Green Bay, the Bears have looked great this season, winning every game by 16 or more and only surrendering 7 sacks in 4 games. While you can’t completely ignore what happened on Thursday Night Football, it’s unreasonable to put too much stock into one game when a team has had 3 days to prepare on the road.

In their other 4 games, with the exception of Jacksonville, who they destroyed in Jacksonville in a potential trap game, they’ve played good opponents. Dallas should be a playoff contender right until the very end. They beat them by 16 in Dallas. Blowout wins over Indianapolis and St. Louis didn’t look impressive at the time, but now they do. Jay Cutler is now 9-1 in his last 10 games, including 22-10 dating back to 2010, including the 2 postseason games that year. Every year, one team goes from out of the playoffs to a first round bye. At the very least, I think the Bears will do that. At most, they might just be the best team in the league, though there’s still a lot left uncertain.

The yards per play method of computing line value suggests this line should be -4.5, while the rate of sustaining drives method suggests it should be -8.5. Given that, it might not seem like there’s any line value either way, but those numbers are much higher if you take out Chicago’s horrific Thursday Night performance. Besides, Detroit has the worst special teams in the league this year, something neither of those metrics captures. I like the matchup of Devin Hester against their special teams.

With the exception of that Thursday Night game, Chicago has covered by 10 or more in each of their 4 games, all of which have been blowouts. That’s a very impressive feat and I’m sticking with the team I proclaimed to be the best in the league here on Monday Night Football, where Jay Cutler is actually 7-3 ATS in his career. Detroit still has a bunch of issues so Chicago should pick up another double digit victory rested off a bye. Chicago is also my survivor pick on a bad week for survivor.

Public lean: Chicago (new thing I’m adding, siding with the odds makers on bets is not a bad thing to do since they make so much money, so I’m listing this here to allow readers to “fade” the public, if they so choose, in this example, the odds makers win if Detroit covers)

Sharps lean: DET 15 CHI 4

Final update: No change, sticking with the Bears. I am, however, going to do a teaser of over 40.5 (normally 46.5) on the Buffalo/Tennessee game and Chicago -0.5 here for 1 unit. Assuming the over 40.5 hits, I can then hedge by taking the Detroit money line at +230 for a unit. That way, if Chicago wins, my teaser hits and I get +100 and lose 100 on the money line, so I don’t lose anything. If Chicago loses, I get the money line of +230 and lose 1 unit on the teaser, so -110, which equals out to be +120.

Assuming the over 40.5 hits in the Buffalo/Tennessee game, I can’t lose and it also allows me to somewhat hedge by Chicago +6.5 play. I like the over in the Buffalo/Tennessee game because neither of those teams can play defense as they rank 31st and 32nd in the league in points per game allowed and because games involving a team that just played a Thursday Night game go over 136 times and 97 times. In a 6 point teaser, that record improves to 184-52 for the over.

Sunday Night Update: I decided I’m not going to hedge. Confident in Bears to win because of how favorites have been doing this week (11-1 straight up, 7-4-1 ATS). It was bound to even out eventually.

Chicago Bears 31 Detroit Lions 17 Survivor Pick (HOU, NE, NO, BAL, SF, ATL)

Pick against spread: Chicago Bears -6.5 (-110) 2 units

Teaser: Over 40.5 Tennessee/Buffalo, Chicago -0.5

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

Pittsburgh Steelers at Cincinnati Bengals: Week 7 NFL Pick

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 7 NFL Picks, Browns, Steelers

Pittsburgh Steelers (2-3) at Cincinnati Bengals (3-3)

What is wrong with the Steelers? After their recent loss in Tennessee, that’s all anyone can ask. Well, the problem is twofold. The first reason is that they just suck on the road as favorites outside of the division. They won 12 games last year and still barely beat Curtis Painter and Tyler Palko. This year, they’ve lost to Oakland and Tennessee.

In fact, in the Mike Tomlin era, generally a successful one, they are 5-15 ATS on the road outside of the division as favorites. Just like the Oakland loss, after which they beat Philadelphia at home, I don’t put a ton of stock into last week’s “surprising loss.” Inside the division, they are 6-5 ATS in that spot in that same time period and 10-6 ATS dating back to 2004, so I’m not worried that they’re favored on the road here again.

The other issue is injuries and this one could be more lingering and have a bigger effect on this game. Last week, already missing LaMarr Woodley and Troy Polamalu, they lost Maurkice Pouncey, Marcus Gilbert, Rashard Mendenhall, and Isaac Redman. Woodley is back this week, which is huge because it means, unless he reinjures himself, this will be the first game all season that LaMarr Woodley and James Harrison will both play in its entirety.

Maurkice Pouncey is also expected to suit up, which is very good news because backup Doug Legursky has time and time again proven himself to be an incapable replacement. Gilbert, however, will be out, which will hurt. Both Mendenhall and Redman will be as well, leaving Jonathan Dwyer to carry the load spelled by Baron Batch and Chris Rainey. However, they haven’t been a good run all year, so they’re not losing much.

The big injury is Troy Polamalu. He’s out once again this week. Since 2009, the Steelers are 7-9 in games without Troy Polamalu and allowed 21.9 points per game. With him, they are 27-8, allowing 14.4 points per game, with him. That’s not all him, but a lot of that is him. He’s their only irreplaceable defensive player and his mere presence can disrupt passing plays and running plays.

However, on the Bengals side, things aren’t going too well either. After starting 3-1, they’ve lost back-to-back games in upset fashion and despite being favored in 5 of their first 6 contests, they sit at just 3-3. Now they enter a tough stretch in which they could be dogs in 6-8 of their next 10. Last week, I picked against Cincinnati at Cleveland, expecting them to be caught looking forward to this big game, with Andy Dalton knowing he’s never beaten a playoff team or either the Steelers or Ravens (a combined 0-5 against those 2 and 0-9, assuming Baltimore makes it this year, against playoff teams).

However, now they’re home dogs after a loss as road favorites. Teams are 49-34 ATS in this spot since2008, including 11-4 ATS when both games are divisional. It makes sense. Last week, a team was good enough to be road favorites, then they lose, and now they’re home dogs all of a sudden. Besides, road favorites before being home dogs is a bad spot as teams have gone 67-102 ATS in that spot since 1989. Teams tend to be focused more on being home dogs than being road favorites and as a result are often better prepared for their next game than their opponent. They also can be undervalued off a disappointing game.

The Bengals, however, are not. Because of the Steelers’ “surprising loss”, this line has actually shifted more towards Cincinnati’s side, going from -3 in favor of Pittsburgh to -1. We’re getting line value with the Steelers, even if it’s very little. The yards per play method of computing line value suggests Pittsburgh should be favored by 3, while the rate of sustaining drives method suggests this should be a pick em. It’s very little line value, but it’s there and we also get a chance to bet against an overreaction. It’s also possible this is one of those “shruken line” games I’ve mentioned in early write ups. With dogs being 57-32 ATS on the year, it makes sense that the odds makers would shrink some lines to get more favorites to cover so the public doesn’t catch on and just start picking all dogs.

At the end of the day, I like Pittsburgh to continue their divisional dominance and their overall dominance of this matchup. The Steelers are 30-20 ATS in the division under Ben Roethlisberger, 25-17 ATS as favorites, and 10-6 ATS as road favorites. He’s also 13-4 ATS against the Bengals. Andy Dalton has still never beaten a playoff team and they’re looking pretty overrated, just like I predicted preseason, having lost to Cleveland and Miami, with wins against only Cleveland, Jacksonville, and Washington. I haven’t bet on them once this year and they’re 2-3-1 ATS, including 0-2 ATS in their last 2. I don’t intend to change that this week, as long as we don’t get field goal protection with the Bengals, though it’s a small play because there’s a lot of uncertainty in this one.

Public lean: Pittsburgh (new thing I’m adding, siding with the odds makers on bets is not a bad thing to do since they make so much money, so I’m listing this here to allow readers to “fade” the public, if they so choose, in this example, the odds makers win if Cincinnati covers)

Sharps lean: CIN 19 PIT 7

Final update: I’m going to drop down a unit. I don’t really have a good feel for this one and the sharps like Cincinnati.

Pittsburgh Steelers 24 Cincinnati Bengals 20

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

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

Dallas Cowboys at Carolina Panthers: Week 7 NFL Pick

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 7 NFL Picks, Cowboys, Panthers

Dallas Cowboys (2-3) at Carolina Panthers (1-4)

Why does it seem like no matter who is coaching the Cowboys, they seem to continue to make the same dumb mistakes? Last week, they dominated throughout essentially, but were frequently penalized, something that’s been an issue for them all year and dating back to last year. They had trouble getting the plays off and had to burn several timeouts. Still, Dez Bryant had a chance for a game tying 2 point conversion, but he dropped it. The Cowboys then recovered the onside kick, but mismanaged the game clock, forcing Dan Bailey to kick from 51 instead of possibly from closer and he predictably missed, giving Baltimore the 2 point victory.

Coming off of that type of loss, it’ll be very interesting to see how they respond to playing the 1-4 Panthers. Most likely, it won’t be positively. Teams are 54-78 ATS as favorites after losing as dogs before being dogs, 17-30 ATS when the next game is divisional. Next week, they play the Giants. That game will be in Dallas, so Dallas will not be dogs, but the logic remains the same. Why would the Cowboys focus on the Panthers with the Giants coming up next? They’ll probably just view this as a chance to get an easy victory and get back on track before they play a real team.

For Carolina, this could be their Super Bowl. They’re coming off a bye, sitting at 1-4, and no one really thinks much of them anymore. Remember, however, this was a popular playoff pick before the season and one of their own players, Ryan Kalil, took out a newspaper ad to promise they would win the Super Bowl. They have an awful lot of pride and won’t just roll over like some other 1-4 teams might.

People who read this frequently know I love to go on and on about yards per play differential. Well, I have another metric that I think works well with yards per play differential, which I’ll go to in a second. First, if you take the difference between Dallas’s yards per play differential and Carolina’s, divide by .15 and add 3 points to Carolina’s side for home field advantage, you get a line of Carolina -1, which suggests 3 points of line value with the Panthers.

One issue I noticed with using solely this metric, which a lot of bettors do, is it puts too much value on teams that get a lot of big plays, but can’t sustain drives (or conversely, teams that don’t allow a lot of big plays, but can’t get off the field defensively). Think about it. You pass for 30 yards and then gain no yards on your next 3 plays and have to punt. That’s 7.5 yards per play, which is incredibly impressive, but you didn’t sustain a drive. So I’ve essentially created a new statistic called, rate of sustaining drives, not to replace the traditional metric, but to see if any teams are much better in one than the other. The Panthers are a perfect example of the type of team yards per play differential overrates. They’re 10th in that statistic, but just 29th in this new metric.

Basically, how I created it is I took first downs and divided it by first downs + turnovers + punts + failed 4thdowns. Basically, what it essentially measures is, on any given 1st and 10, how often does a team get another 1st down or sustain the drive. Turnovers (whether traditional or on downs) and punts are obviously failures to achieve 1st and 10. This measures first downs divided by chances at a first down (first downs + failures to achieve 1st and 10).

You can also do this for the defense, how often they can get the opposing team off the field on any given 1st and 10. The statistic is in the form of a percentage and you can subtract the offensive one from the defensive one to get the differential. For example, Dallas is at +2.7%, while Seattle is at -10.5%. The difference between the percents is 13.2, divide by 1.5 this time (which conveniently works very well with the numbers) and add 3 points either way for home field and you get a line of Dallas -6, so we’re not really getting line value either way. I also wish Carolina wasn’t missing top cornerback Chris Gamble, but this is still a small play on the Panthers.

Public lean: Dallas (new thing I’m adding, siding with the odds makers on bets is not a bad thing to do since they make so much money, so I’m listing this here to allow readers to “fade” the public, if they so choose, in this example, the odds makers win if Carolina covers)

Sharps lean: DAL 16 CAR 8

Final update: No change.

Carolina Panthers 27 Dallas Cowboys 24 Upset Pick +110

Pick against spread: Carolina +2 (-110) 2 units

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

Arizona Cardinals at Minnesota Vikings: Week 7 NFL Pick

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 7 NFL Picks, Cardinals, Vikings

Arizona Cardinals (4-2) at Minnesota Vikings (4-2)

Wow. Who would have thought when these two teams met week 7, it would be a game of 4-2 teams with potential future playoff ramifications. In a year that has once again been full of surprises, these two are probably the league’s two most surprisingly good teams. However, as I’ve said all along, I believe one team is for real and one isn’t.

When Arizona started 4-0, I called them one of the worst 4-0 teams ever and mentioned that I did the same thing with the Broncos in 2009. The Broncos, much like the Cardinals this year, were one of my preseason picks to be among the worst in the league. After the Broncos started 2-0, 3-0, 4-0 etc, I started calling them the worst 2-0, 3-0, 4-0, etc team ever because of how they were winning. I got some negative comments and hate mail for that. The Broncos started 6-0 that year and ended the season 8-8. The Cardinals could see something similar happen.

So many things pointed to the Cardinals’ early start being a fluke. One, Larry Fitzgerald is their only good offensive player. If numbers are more your thing, this team ranked tied for 27th in the league in yards per play differential through 4 games (they are now 28th). They had won 3 games by 3 or fewer points, giving them only a +30 points differential. Contrary to popular belief, winning close games does even out over time.

This team was 10-1 in their last 11 games decided by a touchdown or fewer. Before that, they were 2-8 in their last 10, with essentially the same group of guys. Teams that win more than 67% of their close games win about 50% of those types of games the following season and the same is true midseason. Teams that win a game by 7 points or less are 586-541 (52.0%) since 1989 in their following game if that game is also decided by a touchdown or less. The only exception, historically, has proven to be an elite quarterback, but the Cardinals don’t have that. I’ve bet against them heavily in each of the last 3 weeks, dating back to a near loss at home to Miami and I’ve been right each time.

Minnesota, meanwhile, is for real. They are 8th in the league in yards per play differential and 7th in rate of sustaining drives differential. Last year, in the 9 games in which Ponder led the team in passing attempts, the team scored 22.9 points per game. Despite their 3-13 record, they had a Pythagorean Expectation of 6 wins, despite injuries to several key players.

Now Ponder is healthy and improved, behind a better offensive line. The coaching staff is finally using Percy Harvin properly and he’s emerged as one of the better receivers in the league. Meanwhile, their defense is much improved thanks to the return of Antoine Winfield and Chris Cook, as well as young players playing better. After ranking 20th in the league in yards per play allowed last year, their young defense has broken out and now ranks 3rd.

They had a setback last week in Washington, but I don’t think their season is doomed because of one bad game. Unlike the Cardinals, their important stats check out. Besides, the Redskins in Washington aren’t an easy opponent. They’ve been competitive in every game this year. The Vikings did manage still control the ball better, with 27 first downs to Washington’s 20. Washington actually punted 3 times to 2 for Minnesota. Washington won because they won the yards per play battle 6.6 to 5.3 and the turnover battle 3 to 1. The yards per play battle means something, but the turnover battle doesn’t much so much given the inconsistency of turnovers. They’re still the favorite to be this year’s team that goes from 5 or fewer wins to the playoffs, although Washington is creeping up on them fast.

The problem is that this line indicates that Arizona isn’t for real and Minnesota is because it’s at -7. If you take the difference between Minnesota’s yards per play differential and Arizona’s and divide by .15 and add 3 points to San Francisco’s side for home field advantage, you get a line of 9.5, which suggests 2.5 points of line value with the Vikings.

However, one issue I noticed with using solely this metric, which a lot of bettors do, is it puts too much value on teams that get a lot of big plays, but can’t sustain drives (or conversely, teams that don’t allow a lot of big plays, but can’t get off the field defensively). Think about it. You pass for 30 yards and then gain no yards on your next 3 plays and have to punt. That’s 7.5 yards per play, which is incredibly impressive, but you didn’t sustain a drive. So I’ve essentially created a new statistic called, rate of sustaining drives, not to replace the traditional metric, but to see if any teams are much better in one than the other.

Basically, how I created it is I took first downs and divided it by first downs + turnovers + punts + failed 4th downs. Basically, what it essentially measures is, on any given 1st and 10, how often does a team get another 1st down or sustain the drive. Turnovers (whether traditional or on downs) and punts are obviously failures to achieve 1st and 10. This measures first downs divided by chances at a first down (first downs + failures to achieve 1st and 10).

You can also do this for the defense, how often they can get the opposing team off the field on any given 1st and 10. The statistic is in the form of a percentage and you can subtract the offensive one from the defensive one to get the differential. For example, Minnesota is at +4.1%, while Seattle is at -0.8%. The difference between the percents is 4.9, divide by 1.5 this time (which conveniently works very well with the numbers) and add 3 points either way for home field and you get a line of Minnesota -5.5. I don’t think we really have line value either way.

It’s also worth noting this line has shifted 3 points since last week, which doesn’t make any sense since Minnesota lost. Arizona also lost and that was bad and they also lost Kevin Kolb, but I don’t think either of those things is worth a 3 point line value. Kolb was leading a miserable offense anyway. Arizona’s defense is still really good despite their recent struggles. Because of that, they should be able to keep this a close game and I like getting 7 with them. Dating back to last year, just 4 of their 10 losses have come by a touchdown or more. As long as we’re getting a touchdown with them, it’s a small play on the road team to cover, but fail to come up with a victory.

Public lean: Minnesota (new thing I’m adding, siding with the odds makers on bets is not a bad thing to do since they make so much money, so I’m listing this here to allow readers to “fade” the public, if they so choose, in this example, the odds makers win if Arizona covers)

Sharps lean: ARI 18 MIN 4

Final update: Sharps really like Arizona. I’ll add a unit. Arizona should be able to keep this one close.

Minnesota Vikings 17 Arizona Cardinals 13

Pick against spread: Arizona +7 (-110) 2 units

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

Jacksonville Jaguars at Oakland Raiders: Week 7 NFL Pick

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 7 NFL Picks, Jaguars, Raiders

Jacksonville Jaguars (1-4) at Oakland Raiders (1-4)

In the write up for Colts/Browns, I mentioned Bill Simmons’ theory from his picks column this week that because dogs are doing so well this year (57-32 ATS), the odds makers would start shrinking the spreads to compensate so the general public won’t catch on and just starting betting all dogs. He used that as part of his argument to pick Buffalo -3 over Tennessee and I used as part of my argument to pick Indianapolis -2 over Cleveland (I don’t think Buffalo and Tennessee are as unevenly matched as he thinks as they both have almost actually the same numbers in yards per play and rate of sustaining drives differential).

However, one thing we both agree on is that the spread has not been shrunk on this game. He took them at +4.5 and I would have too. Now, the spread has even jumped to +6. Given the rate dogs have been covering this year, there’s no way Oakland should be laying more than 3 at home. The reason behind this line not being shrunken is that the public seems to be overrating Oakland. After all, they won 8 games last year, beat Pittsburgh and almost beat Atlanta.

Even with a non-shrunken spread, there’s still a heavy public lean on Oakland. The odds makers have moved this line all the way up to 6 and still there’s heavy public action on Oakland. I love to fade heavy public leans because the public always ends up losing money. I’m not worried about the “fishy” line movement because it’s in the same direction of the line action and it’s also injury related. Daryl Smith, Dwight Lowery, and Laurent Robinson have all been ruled out when all looked like they could play earlier this week. Lowery and Robinson aren’t significant enough players for their absence to factor into this one and Smith has been out all year.

The argument behind Oakland being overrated is this: They won 8 games last year, but only had a Pythagorean Expectation of 6 wins. They also lost several key players in the offseason, including top cornerback Stanford Routt and Kamerion Wimbley. I called them overrated before the season and they have still managed to remain overrated despite a 1-4 record because of some “impressive performances.”

Yes, they beat Pittsburgh at home in Oakland, but so did Tennessee. Pittsburgh is just a horrific road team outside of the division. Last year, they almost lost to Curtis Painter and Tyler Palko on the road. The Atlanta game, meanwhile, can probably just be chalked up to Atlanta having a bad game or to the Falcons not being as good as their record. Remember, they beat Carolina by just 2 at home a couple weeks ago and they’re not any good either. Oakland has also lost in big blowout losses in Miami and Denver. They don’t deserve to be laying this many points over anyone, even the Jaguars, who are probably the league’s worst team.

The two measures of “real” line I normally use actually do say this line is reasonable or even a little small. The yards per play method says this line should be Oakland -12.5 and the rate of sustaining drives method says it should be -8. However, we need to add a human element to those formulas and realize they’re complete bullshit in this game. Jacksonville ranking by far dead last in both is skewing things. The yards per play method actually suggests everyone in the league would be at least 6.5 point favorites over Jacksonville, while the rate of sustaining drives method says everyone in the league would be at least 5.5 point favorites.

There’s actually a trend that says that Oakland doesn’t deserve to be laying this many points, even against an opponent as atrocious as Jacksonville. Teams that finished 6-10 or worse are 23-64 ATS since 2002. I know Jacksonville is atrocious, but I’d be willing to bet most of those teams that covered in those situations as 6+ dogs were as well. You kind of have to be to be dogs this big against a bad team. It’s unfortunate I don’t get to use this trend often (it also was in play 4 times last year), but I love using it when I can and with Oakland at 1-4 now, I think it’s safe to say I can.

Oakland is also in a bad spot as favorites after losing as dogs and before being dogs. Oakland lost in Atlanta last week and will go to Kansas City next week. Teams are 54-78 ATS in that spot since 2008, including 17-30 ATS when their opponent in the following week is divisional, which Kansas City obviously is. Jacksonville is horrible, but there are cases where every team is bettable. Oakland is unbettable in this spot and I do like Jacksonville a great deal. 23-64 ATS is hard to ignore. This is one of 3 co-picks of the week. I’m 8-2 on picks of the week and co-picks of the week this year.

Public lean: Oakland (new thing I’m adding, siding with the odds makers on bets is not a bad thing to do since they make so much money, so I’m listing this here to allow readers to “fade” the public, if they so choose, in this example, the odds makers win if Jacksonville covers)

Sharps lean: JAC 12 OAK 7

Final update: LV Hilton line was at 4.5. I love Jacksonville at +6 because of the 6 and 6 rule. This is still a co-pick of the week.

Oakland Raiders 23 Jacksonville Jaguars 20

Pick against spread: Jacksonville +6 (-110) 4 units

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

Cleveland Browns at Indianapolis Colts: Week 7 NFL Pick

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 7 NFL Picks, Browns, Colts

Cleveland Browns (1-5) at Indianapolis Colts (2-3)

Indianapolis is in a tough spot this week as favorites before being dogs and after losing as dogs. Teams are 54-78 ATS in that spot since 2008. Last week, they lost 35-9 to the Jets as 3.5 point dogs and next week they travel to Tennessee, where they will be dogs as well and in between, they get a home game against the Browns. They could easily be viewing this as a chance for an easy win and get caught looking forward to a game against a divisional rival in Tennessee. By the way, that trend becomes even more significant when the following game is a divisional clash. Teams are 17-30 ATS in this spot before a divisional clash.

In spite of that, the public still expects them to bounce back this week as it’s a fairly significant public lean on Indianapolis. I love to go against public leans as often as I can because the public loses every year. There’s a reason odds makers are rich. The odds makers are not a bad group to be siding with overall because they always make money.

That being said, I’m taking Indianapolis here for several reasons. The first is the line value we’re getting with the Colts. No matter which approach you use to compute line value, either yards per play differential or rate of sustaining drives differential, the Colts are the better team and we’re getting line value. I prefer to use both.

Yards per play differential overvalues teams that either get a lot of big plays, but struggle to sustain drives, or teams that don’t allow a lot of big plays, but can’t get off the field defensively. Those are the exact same teams that rate of sustaining drives undervalues. Using the two metrics together can provide a clearer picture of how teams are playing.

Using the yards per play differential method, this line should be -3.5 (Colts’ yards per play differential – Browns’ yards per play differential/.15 and then add 3 for home field). Using the rate of sustaining drives method, this line should be -8.5 (Colts’ rate of sustaining drives differential – Browns’ rate of sustaining drives differential/1.5 and then add 3 for home field). For the record, rate of sustaining drives means, on any given set of downs, how often do you get a 1st down (or score) and vice versa for the defense. Either method, the Colts are the better team and we’re getting line value with them.

This line has moved 2 points from last week, when it was at -4 in favor of Indianapolis. That’s because Cleveland pulled out a “surprising” home victory over the Bengals, a victory that wasn’t surprising if you knew that Cincinnati was overrated and that home dogs are covering at a 66.7% rate this year. It’s also because the Colts got blown out by the Jets, which was more surprising, but still not enough reason for this line to be -2, which suggests that on a neutral field, Cleveland is better than Indianapolis by 1 point. Didn’t they just beat the Packers two weeks ago? Week 2 they beat the Vikings, which looks a lot better than now than it did then.

Also, Bill Simmons brought up an interesting point this week in his picks column. Dogs are dominating this year going 57-32 ATS. As a result, he believes, the odds makers seem to be shrinking lines. That makes sense. I just wished I liked more favorites this week. One example he brings up is Buffalo -3 over Tennessee, but both yards per play and rate of sustaining drives suggests those two teams are exactly equal. He also picks Jacksonville +4.5 over Oakland because he feels the line should have been shrunk there and it wasn’t because they’re overrating Oakland, which I totally agree with, but I would also add that they’re overrating them because the public is and they can afford not to shrink it. Oakland is a heavy public lean this week. In this case, however, it does seem that the odds makers have shrunken the spread because dogs are covering so much.

Besides, the Colts’ loss last week is explainable as they were coming off an emotional win over the Packers and completely overlooked the “pathetic” Jets. This week, they could easily have that positive ChuckStrong mojo going for them again. The biggest tangible reasons for their loss last week were their inability to stop the run and their -4 differential in turnovers. Anyone who reads these picks frequently know how much I hate to put much stock into turnover differential. On average, teams that win the turnover battle by 4 and teams that lose the turnover battle by 4 have the same turnover differential in their next game, about +0.0, and the same is true for every turnover differential in between.

Their inability to stop the run and their overall defensive struggles were a big part of the reason they lost last week as well and injuries can be blamed for that. Already missing Robert Mathis, Vontae Davis, and Pat Angerer last week, the Colts saw Cory Redding go down with an injury early. This week, Redding is going to be out once again, as is Mathis, but Davis and Angerer are expected to return to the lineup. Remember, Angerer has been out all season and Dwight Freeney went down early week 1. They haven’t been healthy all year. They still aren’t, but this is probably the healthiest they’ve been since the 1st quarter of week 1. Even if it isn’t, they’ll be healthier than last week. The Colts are in a bad spot, but as long as we’re not field goal protection with the Browns, I’m taking the home team.

Public lean: Indianapolis (new thing I’m adding, siding with the odds makers on bets is not a bad thing to do since they make so much money, so I’m listing this here to allow readers to “fade” the public, if they so choose, in this example, the odds makers win if Cleveland covers)

Sharps lean: CLE 17 IND 4

Final update: Sharps don’t like Indianapolis, but it’s worth noting the line for LV Hilton is -3. I don’t want to take the Browns on the road getting less than a field goal.

Indianapolis Colts 23 Cleveland Browns 20

Pick against spread: Indianapolis -2 (-110) 1 unit

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

Green Bay Packers at St. Louis Rams: Week 7 NFL Pick

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 7 NFL Picks, Packers, Rams

Green Bay Packers (3-3) at St. Louis Rams (3-3)

It’s funny how much the general public likes to overreact to one game. Last week, everyone was talking about “what’s wrong with the Packers?” and now some people are calling them the best team in the NFL once again. On top of that, they are being very heavily bet as road dogs here. As you may know if you read these picks often, I love to fade the public.

My opinion is that they weren’t as bad as they looked after the loss to the Colts’ and they aren’t as good as they look now. They could easily be 5-1 if it hadn’t been for the touchception and ChuckStrong, but they’re also not as good as they were last year. The passing offense, overall, is not as good and they do seem to miss Greg Jennings, overall. Not last week, but overall. He won’t play in this one. They also don’t run the ball as well as they did last year nor do they pass protect as well. Meanwhile, they’re not dominating the turnover battle like they did last year, predictable if you know anything about turnover differentials.

They still rank just 11th in yards per play, while St. Louis ranks 15th. The yards per play method of computing the “real” line actually suggests this line should be St. Louis by 2.5. In terms of rate of sustaining drives differential, they rank 8th, while St. Louis ranks 21st, but it’s pretty crowded in the middle, as you would expect if you’ve been watching teams this season, and that method of computing the “real” line suggests this should be a pick em. Either way you’re getting line value with the Rams.

In order for this line to be valid, the Packers would have to rank 1st in yards per play differential and 3rd in rate of sustaining drives differential. They’re not the powerhouse they were last year and the Rams are hardly the pushover they were last year. Despite injuries in his receiving corps and on his offensive line, Sam Bradford played arguably the best game of his season last week in Miami against a tough defense. He’s really matured and is much better coached. He seems to have taken the leap to the type of quarterback who can succeed with a bunch of “next men up” in the lineup around him, something he couldn’t do last year. Defensively, they’re also much improved. At home, they should be able to keep it close with a Packers team that won’t be nearly as fired to play the Rams as they were to play the Texans last week.

Besides, home dogs are dominating this year, going 22-11 ATS. That speaks that the high level of parity that’s been present this season, something I alluded to earlier. In fact, teams are 19-14 straight up as home dogs this season. I don’t think the Rams will win straight up here, but stranger things have happened. They’ve already pulled 3 upsets as home dogs this season and they are 5-1 ATS overall. Dating back to 2010, home dogs of 6+ are 37-23 ATS. I like being able to fade a heavy public lean with an underrated team against an overrated team and take a home dog, especially a big home dog, at the same time. As long as this line is 6 (a key number in betting circles), it’s a 3 unit pick on a week that’s overall devoid of good plays.

Public lean: Green Bay (new thing I’m adding, siding with the odds makers on bets is not a bad thing to do since they make so much money, so I’m listing this here to allow readers to “fade” the public, if they so choose, in this example, the odds makers win if St. Louis covers)

Sharps lean: STL 21 GB 6

Final update: BJ Raji, Nick Perry, and Sam Shields have all been ruled out for Green Bay, which hurts their defense. Besides, the sharps love St. Louis even at the LV Hilton line of -5.5. I do too. This spread is at least 3 points too high. St. Louis is no pushover and Green Bay is banged up defensively, not the same offensively, and not winning the turnover battle like last year. This is a co-pick of the week for 4 units.

I also think there’s value with the money line at +200. This is what’s known as a teaser killer line. Since 2002, 6 point road favorites are 27-13 straight up. For reference, 5 point road favorites are 19-8 and 7 point road favorites are 37-10, both of which are higher winning percentages. The odds makers don’t mess around. They know if they have Green Bay -6, lots of people will put them in teasers at PK.

St. Louis Rams 24 Green Bay Packers 23 Upset Pick +200

Pick against spread: St. Louis +6 (-110) 4 units

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

Baltimore Ravens at Houston Texans: Week 7 NFL Pick

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 7 NFL Picks, Ravens, Texans

Baltimore Ravens (5-1) at Houston Texans (5-1)

This is a very interesting game for a number of reasons. The most obvious is Baltimore’s injuries. This line was at -4 a week ago, but because of Baltimore’s injuries, it’s shifted 3 points, even though Baltimore won and Houston got blown out at home. In spite of that, we still are getting a slight public lean on Houston. Houston is heading into a bye this week and touchdown favorites heading into a bye are 43-20 ATS since 2002, which would appear to make Houston the obvious choice this week. However, it must be questioned, because of the huge line movement, if Houston deserves to be touchdown favorites here. If they don’t, it makes more sense to take the points and fade the public.

In order to determine if Houston deserves to be favored by this much over the Ravens, it must be discussed, what kind of team Baltimore had before injuries, how the injuries will affect their talent level, and what kind of mental state they will be in and other intangibles. The first thing is the simplest. We’ll just look at an old gambler stat: yards per play differential.

Injuries aside, Baltimore ranks 2nd in the league in yards per play differential, actually higher than Houston. An old formula says to take the difference in differentials, divide by .15 and add 3 points either way to get the “real” line. By that formula, Baltimore should actually be favored by a half point here on the road, injuries aside of course.

One issue I noticed with using solely this metric, which a lot of bettors do, is it puts too much value on teams that get a lot of big plays, but can’t sustain drives (or conversely, teams that don’t allow a lot of big plays, but can’t get off the field defensively). Think about it. You pass for 30 yards and then gain no yards on your next 3 plays and have to punt. That’s 7.5 yards per play, which is incredibly impressive, but you didn’t sustain a drive. So I’ve essentially created a new statistic called, rate of sustaining drives, not to replace the traditional metric, but to see if any teams are much better in one than the other.

Basically, how I created it is I took first downs and divided it by first downs + turnovers + punts + failed 4th downs. Basically, what it essentially measures is, on any given 1st and 10, how often does a team get another 1st down or sustain the drive. Turnovers (whether traditional or on downs) and punts are obviously failures to achieve 1st and 10. This measures first downs divided by chances at a first down (first downs + failures to achieve 1st and 10).

You can also do this for the defense, how often they can get the opposing team off the field on any given 1st and 10. The statistic is in the form of a percentage and you can subtract the offensive one from the defensive one to get the differential. For example, Houston is at +10.1%, while Baltimore is at +0.2%. The difference between the percents is 9.9, divide by 1.5 this time (which conveniently works very well with the numbers) and add 3 points either way for home field and you get a line of Houston -9.5.

It’s also worth noting that their yards per play differential metric is heavily based on their rank as the league’s #1 team in yards per play. If you truly believe this is the #1 offense in the league, then the yards per play differential metric should make sense to you alone, but if you don’t believe that, which you probably don’t, then you probably disagree that they were the 2nd best team in the league before injuries.

One thing that both metrics agrees about the Ravens is that they were an average defense team before the injuries. That will obviously decline (more on that later) with the injuries, but it’s worth noting that this team wasn’t playing great football before the injuries either. They’ve won 4 straight, but all by 7 or fewer, including games against the lowly Chiefs and Browns. Teams are 11-16 ATS off 4 straight wins of 7 or fewer, which makes some sense because they tend to be overrated based solely off their record,

Now going onto the injuries, the one that everyone is talking about is Ray Lewis, but that’s not their most important injury. He’s been pretty average, not just by his standards, but by anyone’s standards this year. They’ll miss his on the field leadership most of all, but he’ll still be around as a locker room presence. Lardarius Webb’s injury will hurt the most. One of two starting cornerbacks to not surrender a touchdown last year, Webb has allowed 11 catches for 111 yards on 24 attempts, with 1 interception this year and was by far their best defensive back on a struggling pass defense, which already ranked 22nd in the league in YPA allowed. Their struggling pass rush wasn’t helping things as they rank 27th in pass rush efficiency.

Speaking of the pass rush, guess who is trying to play football this weekend: Terrell Suggs. Yes, less than 6 months after tearing his Achilles, Suggs’ friends and family are expected to be at the game in Houston watching him play, barring a setback. Suggs was activated from the PUP this week and was expected to begin light practice with the hope of returning in 3 weeks, but with Lewis and Webb going down, Suggs obviously felt a sense of urgency. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that the reason their pass rush is struggling this year is because of Suggs’ absence.

However, I question if this is a wise move for Suggs. I love the intensity and competitiveness to want to be out there and helping your team and him playing, or even him not playing but trying to play, could be a huge emotional boost for this team (more on that later). However, guys seem to be coming back from major injuries like torn ACLs or Achilles much faster than normal and they rarely have success.

Just this year, guys like Leon Hall and Rashard Mendenhall came back from injuries that normally take a year in 10 and 9 months respectively. Both struggled before suffering another leg injury, likely caused by overcompensation. Going back a few years, Wes Welker returned in 8 months and while he didn’t get reinjured, he had by far his worst season with the Patriots. Adrian Peterson seems to be the only one who has returned from a major injury, been his old self, and not reinjured himself and he’s a freak of nature. I don’t question that Suggs is as well, but the odds are against him and even Peterson took 9 months. Suggs could have a major emotional impact on this team, but I doubt he’d play well.

That leads perfectly into the emotional aspect. Think about the Ravens’ situation this week. They’re 5-1 and one of only two teams in the conference with a winning record. You’re getting a chance to play the other winning team in your conference, a team you beat twice last year, and people are not only writing you off in this game because of a couple injuries, but predicting that you will miss the playoffs and even if you make it, you won’t advance deep. It’s all over the media. This is a proud veteran team with plenty of bulletin board material. They’re touchdown underdogs here, something that’s only happened once in the John Harbaugh era in Baltimore, a cover and near win in New England in last year’s AFC Championship game. Suggs’ attempt to return has to only get them fired up even more for this game.

One other trend works against Houston. Teams who start 4-0 or better are 19-31 ATS as a favorite off their first loss. I also want to mention one injury that no one is talking about: Brian Cushing, who is also done for the year. He tore his ACL 2 weeks ago against the Jets and in their first game without him, the Texans surrendered 42 points at home to the Packers, but no one seems to care about that. There’ are a lot of uncertainties in this game thanks to injuries, but I’m going to grab the points and fade the public for a small play.

Public lean: Baltimore (new thing I’m adding, siding with the odds makers on bets is not a bad thing to do since they make so much money, so I’m listing this here to allow readers to “fade” the public, if they so choose, in this example, the odds makers win if Houston covers.

Sharps lean: HOU 11 BAL 11

Final update: Terrell Suggs will play for the Ravens. That’s a huge emotional lift for a team already playing for respect. I’m adding another unit on Baltimore.

Houston Texans 31 Baltimore Ravens 27

Pick against spread: Baltimore +7 (-110) 2 units

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]