2012 Week 5 NFL Picks

Green Bay Packers (2-2) at Indianapolis Colts (1-2)

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 5 NFL Picks, Colts, Packers

Green Bay Packers (2-2) at Indianapolis Colts (1-2)

Obviously, I can’t do this write up without talking about Chuck Pagano. You’ve probably heard the news, but if you haven’t, Pagano, an 11 year NFL assistant who got his first Head Coaching job this offseason as Head Coach of the Colts, was unfortunately diagnosed with a treatable form of leukemia  earlier this week, a few days before he celebrated his 52nd birthday on October 2nd. He has left the team in order to undergo treatment, including chemotherapy, and will hopefully make a speedy recovery. In his absence, offensive coordinator Bruce Arians will be interim Head Coach. This is obviously a very unfortunately situation and one that will impact this team.

Earlier this week, I was torn on how it would impact them. They could have come out totally unprepared and get blown out or they could have come out and had the game of their lives in his honor. However, now I really am leaning towards the latter. They’re coming off a bye, so they’ve had two weeks to prepare for this game, plus the loss of Pagano as Head Coach is not as important as say losing Sean Payton. Pagano has been Head Coach of this team for 3 games and Arians calls the plays anyway. I think it’s much more likely this will have a positive effect on this team than a negative one, at least this week.

Speaking of that bye week, it couldn’t have come at a better time for the Colts. The Colts, one of my preseason underrated teams, really looked underwhelming before the bye, getting blown out by Chicago, barely beating Minnesota (although Minnesota has looked good, so maybe that is an impressive win), and then losing at home to Jacksonville in an absolutely abysmal defensive effort.

Injuries were a huge part of that, especially defensively, with cornerback Vontae Davis, rush linebacker Dwight Freeney, and middle linebacker Pat Angerer all being out before the bye. On a defense that lacked talent to begin with, that really hurt and the bye seems to have given them much needed rest. Freeney and Angerer are expected back, while Davis looks questionable after sitting out practice on Wednesday. With that trio back, or even just two-thids, they should be able to put up somewhat of a fight defensively and on the offensive side of the ball, don’t forget about Andrew Luck, who was looked like the real deal this year.

In spite of all of their injuries, the Colts rank just 24th in yards per play differential, which isn’t horrendous. That’s only .5 yards per play worse than the Packers, who seem to be out of sync this year. When their defensive effort is good, their offense is off and vice versa. An old gambling formula says divide the differential by .15 and add 3 points either way for home field to get the “real line”. That formula says this line should be -.5 in favor of the Packers, so we have a full 7 points of line value with the Colts. In spite of that, there’s a big public lean on the Colts and I love to bet against the public, especially on big leans.

Keep in mind, that “real line” is before you consider that the Colts are getting healthier. You can argue that the Packers are better than their yards per play differential would suggest, but either way, you’re going to find there’s some line value with the Colts. Green Bay would have to be a whole 1 yard per play better than where they’re at now for this line to be valid and that would tie them for 2nd with Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Dallas, and that’s before injury situation consideration. On top of that, home dogs of 7+ are 98-78 ATS since 2002. As long as I get touchdown protection, this is a significant bet on the Colts.

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 Indianapolis covers)

Sharps lean: GB 10 IND 5

Final update: Dropping a unit. The sharps don’t seem to like Indianapolis at all and Angerer and Davis will both miss this one and Dwight Freeney will be limited. Greg Jennings is out for Green Bay though.

Green Bay Packers 31 Indianapolis Colts 27

Pick against spread: Indianapolis +7 (-105) 2 units

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

Baltimore Ravens (3-1) at Kansas City Chiefs (1-3)

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 5 NFL Picks, Chiefs, Ravens

Baltimore Ravens (3-1) at Kansas City Chiefs (1-3)

I ranked the Ravens ranked 3rd in my Power Rankings and called them the 2nd best team in the AFC behind Houston because of the head-to-head win over New England and their superior yards per play differential over New England. I think that New England and Baltimore are both going to finish around 12-4 and with Houston likely to win the AFC, that would leave those two tied for the 2nd seed with the tiebreaker going to Baltimore, by virtue of the head-to-head win, making a likely rematch in the AFC divisional round one in which Baltimore would more likely to win

All that being said, this team really needs to kick their inconsistency habit. I came away from their win over Cleveland very unimpressed and disappointed that this team played down to the level of their opponent once again. They’ll have to prove they can avoid doing that this week. Last year, they were just 2-6 ATS outside of the division against non-playoff teams and their one win was in St. Louis after they had been embarrassed the week before in Tennessee. And at home against Arizona, even a loss the week before in Jacksonville wasn’t enough to embarrass them into avoiding a near loss to the Cardinals. They were even worse on the road, not just going 1-4 ATS, but actually 1-4 SU. Losing in Kansas City this week is definitely possible because they lost in similar situations in Jacksonville, Tennessee, Seattle, and San Diego last year.

Kansas City, meanwhile, looked horrendous last week, turning the ball over 6 times en route to a -5 day in turnovers. As a result of this, the odds makers have been able to move the spread 2.5 points (it was -4 last week) and the public is STILL pounding Baltimore, with a very heavy lean. I love betting against the public, especially on heavy leans. What the public doesn’t understand is how inconsistent turnovers are. Teams that lose the turnover differential battle by 5 have a turnover differential of an average of +0.0 in their following game since 2002. That’s essentially true for every turnover differential bracket you can think of. Kansas City is very underrated and undervalued coming off that loss. Their yards per play differential is actually just -0.2, which isn’t terrible.

Speaking of yards per play differential, an old gambling formula says to take the difference, divide by .15 and add 3 points either way for home field. By that logic, this formula should be -5. It’s not a huge difference at all, but you can argue that should be even lower. The reason Baltimore’s yards per play differential is so good is because Joe Flacco has been very good. You can argue though that he’s not actually an improved quarterback over the rest of his career. The jury is still out.

One thing that’s definitely different for the Ravens this year is their defense and that’s not a good thing. Their defensive yards per play allowed is very pedestrian and a 22nd ranked pass defense has a lot to do with it. The biggest reason for this is that they aren’t getting much of a pass rush as they rank 24th in pass rush productivity. They clearly miss Terrell Suggs.

Matt Cassel and company should be able to move the ball this week, so long as they don’t implode with turnovers again and if Baltimore plays down to the level of the competition yet again, Kansas City could definitely win. The only reasons this isn’t my stand alone pick of the week are that perhaps narrowing beating the Browns last week delivered a wakeup call to them and they won’t play down to the level of the competition. Also, the Ravens are extra rested after a Thursday Night game. Teams off of those games are 111-89 ATS on Sundays since 1989. I wish I had touchdown protection. Still, it’s a significant play and a co-pick of the week.

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 Kansas City covers)

Update: One cool trend, dogs before being favorites are 72-42 ATS since 2011, including 19-8 ATS off a loss as a dog.

Sharps lean: BAL 13 KC 7

Final update: The sharps don’t like Kansas City, but this is one instance I’m not afraid to disagree with the sharps. This is the exact type of game Baltimore has trouble with and the public is pounding Baltimore because of how bad Kansas City was last week, even though their only issue was turnovers.

Kansas City Chiefs 23 Baltimore Ravens 20 Upset Pick +235

Pick against spread: Kansas City +6.5 (-110) 4 units

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

Cleveland Browns (0-4) at New York Giants (2-2)

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 5 NFL Picks, Browns, Giants

Cleveland Browns (0-4) at New York Giants (2-2)

In my weekly Power Rankings, I had the Browns in last for the 3rd straight week, but I didn’t feel comfortable about. Yes, the Browns are one of two remaining 0-4 teams and compared to the other one, New Orleans, they’re much less likely to turn things around. They’re the only 0-4 team that isn’t really a surprise. Everyone predicted they’d be bad, as they had been for years, and that’s been the case.

However, I really didn’t feel like they’ve been awful. They have lost a single game by more than 10 points and they’ve had a fairly tough schedule, playing Philadelphia, Cincinnati, Buffalo, and then Baltimore. Jacksonville has a win, but I don’t feel like they’ve looked good in any of their games, even their win, and their 2nd year quarterback appears to be much more of a bust than the Browns’ 1st year quarterback Brandon Weeden, who has improved as this season has gone on.

The Browns, meanwhile, rank just 23rd in the league in yards per play differential, which is not horrendous at all. If I were to compare then to Minnesota, Miami, Indianapolis, and St. Louis, all of whom started last year 0-4, I think they’re closer to Miami, who eventually finished 6-10, than the other three, who all got top-3 picks in the NFL draft.

So yes, the Browns are bad, but I they’re not awful and I feel like they’re underrated. Also, given that they have only lost 1 game by more than a touchdown and none by more than 10, I like that we’re getting 9 points with them this week. They’re 2-1-1 ATS this year and should be able to keep this one close again and improve to 3-1-1. On trend that works in Cleveland’s favor, teams in their 2nd straight road game as dogs off a loss are 59-38 ATS since 2008.

I also like that the public is betting the Giants, yet the spread is still falling. Also, even though the spread is falling, there is line value here. Going back to the Browns’ 23rd ranked yards per play differential, they have a differential .4 yards worse than the Giants. An old gambling formula tells says to divide that by .15 and add 3 for home field either way. By that logic, this line should be -5.5 in favor of the Giants, so we get 3 points of line value, which is significant. They’re also rested coming off 10 days rest, a situation teams are 111-89 ATS in since 1989.

Now, onto the Giants. They’re in a very tough spot this week. They’re coming off a loss to the Eagles as dogs and looking forward to a trip to San Francisco, where they will certainly be dogs. This is a classic breather game for them against the “lowly” Browns. Teams in that situation are 52-78 ATS since 2008. They’re also incredibly banged up. Kenny Phillips is expected to miss this game, which will hurt a pass defense that already ranks dead last in the league in YPA. An improving Brandon Weeden should be able to move the ball on them, just like everyone else has.

Hakeem Nicks and Ramses Barden are also expected to miss, though that’s not as big because Eli has proven he can put up big numbers in spite of banged up receiving corps. On top of that, two starting offensive lineman might not play. Eli is one of the best in the league at avoiding sacks when under pressure, but like any quarterback, his completion percentage does drop under pressure. Finally, this team is just 22-30 ATS at home since 2006 and 40-18 ATS on the road. I love exploiting these road/home disparities. Banged up and in a breather game situation, the Giants could find themselves in a game very similar to their week 2 game, needing a comeback to beat an inferior opponent.

Public lean: NY Giants (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)

Sharp lean: CLE 8 NYG 2

Final Update: The LV Hilton sharps seem very afraid to bet this game for some reason, but when do they, they pick Cleveland. No one likes the Giants this week. I feel pretty confident about this one.

New York Giants 31 Cleveland Browns 27

Pick against spread: Cleveland +9 (-110) 4 units

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

Arizona Cardinals (4-0) at St. Louis Rams (2-2)

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 5 NFL Picks, Cardinals, Rams

Arizona Cardinals (4-0) at St. Louis Rams (2-2)

I was going to call the Cardinals the worst 4-0 team ever, but then I remembered the 2009 Broncos. The 2009 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, proving their start was a fluke. The Cardinals could see something similar happen.

So many things point to this being a fluke. One, Larry Fitzgerald is their only good offensive player. If numbers are more your thing, this team ranks tied for 27th in the league in yards per play differential. They’ve 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 is 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.

Eventually, this team will even out at around .500. I started riding the correction with this team last week and nailed one of my co-picks of the week (actually I nailed all 3) and I’m going to continue that going forward. Last week I mentioned a trend that teams are 7-12 ATS as a favorite after winning 3 straight as dogs. Well, how do those teams do the following week? Those teams are 5-14 ATS the following week, 2-6 ATS as favorites. It’s a big dynamic switch and it doesn’t affect them just once.

The Cardinals struggled with that last week and should continue to struggle with it this week. One other thing they struggled with last week was defensive line play without Darnell Dockett. He’s expected to be out this week too. Defense is their calling card so his absence is predictably huge. I mentioned the Cardinals’ 27th ranked yards per play differential. The Cardinals lost that battle 6.5 to 4.2 to the lowly Dolphins at home last week and only won because they were able to recover all 6 fumbles that hit the ground. Recovering fumbles on the ground is much more luck than skill.

Now onto the Rams, they’re not great, but they beat a similar team last week, the Seattle Seahawks. I nailed that one too, another one of my co-picks of the week. The Seahawks are known for being a much worse road team than home team, but the NFC West is more or less like this as a whole, especially in the division. Since 2007, home teams are 37-23 ATS in NFC West divisional games. Even the 2011 49ers, who were the best single team this division has seen in that time period, went 1-2 on the road last year, losing in Arizona, winning but failing to cover as large favorites in St. Louis, and then barely coming away with a 2 point win in Seattle (the line was -1.5). St. Louis is a good home team anyway, going 5-3 at home in 2010, the last time they were a respectable team (which I think they are again). This year, they’re 2-0 at home, winning twice as home dogs.

The Cardinals are at a disadvantage traveling on a short week too. Thursday Home teams are 66-48 ATS since 1989. Now, they are 20-23 ATS as dogs and I fell into this trap with Carolina 2 weeks ago (although Carolina eventually became a small favorite with line movement). Veteran, experienced teams, who are normally favored, do seem to have the edge in this game and that edge cancels out the short travel week. However, it’s tough to call the Cardinals that since they have one of the younger rosters in the NFL. St. Louis has the advantage on a short week here, especially with Arizona coming off an overtime game. Teams coming off an overtime game are predictably exhausted the next week, so it’s tough to be 100% for a Thursday Night game. Teams are 3-13 ATS in this situation since 1989, 1-10 ATS on the road.

We’re also getting good line value with the Rams. I mentioned the Cardinals’ 27th ranked yards per play differential several times (even worse last week), they’re at -0.7, which is the same as the Rams. An old gambling formula says to take the difference between two teams’ yards per play differentials and add 3 either way for homefield advantage. That suggests the Rams should be -3 here, not +1.5. In spite of that, the public loves Arizona this week. I love fading the public as often as I can. The odds makers are rich for a reason. The public always loses so they’re never a bad group to disagree with.

Given everything, this is one of my biggest plays of the week. Arizona is a very overrated team, especially likely without Darnell Dockett. They’re in a tough spot coming off an overtime game and then having to travel for a short week and play a team that just played a home game and didn’t have to go anywhere. NFC West divisional games tend to see the home team cover anyway. Instead of putting 4 units on the spread and 1 unit on the money line, I’m putting all 5 on the money line. 1 point games are rare, about 2% of the time, and it’s not worth the extra 15 cents to be protected against something that would hurt me 1% of the time. I’m also putting 1 unit on the under. Neither of these teams are offensive teams anyway and the under is 68-50 on Thursdays since 1989.

Public lean: Arizona (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)

St. Louis Rams 17 Arizona Cardinals 10 Upset Pick +105 5 units

Pick against spread: St. Louis +1.5 (-110) 0 units

Over/under: Under 39 1 unit

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

[switch_ad_hub]

Week 4 NFL Picks Results

stevenlourie 2012 NFL Picks, 2012 Week 5 NFL Picks

Week 4 Results

ATS: 10-5 +25 units/+2260

SU: 11-4

Upset Picks: 3-3 -75

Over/Under: 1-0 +100

Total: +$2285

Public Results ATS*: 7-8 +4 units

2012 results to date

ATS: 32-28-3 +18 units/+1055

SU: 36-27

Upset Picks: 12-14 +$0

Over/Under: 2-0 +200

Total: +1255

Survivor: 2-2 (HOU, NE, NO, BAL)

Public Results ATS*: 27-35-1 -22 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]