ThatDonGuy
ThatDonGuy
Joined: Jun 22, 2011
  • Threads: 69
  • Posts: 3046
January 23rd, 2017 at 10:40:04 AM permalink
Quote: kmumf

This whole post just hurt my brain. Is this from last year?


Why, yes - yes, it is. I should have noticed all of the references to "Carolina" and "Denver", shouldn't I? I thought that was one of those "alternative facts" you read about.

Serves me right for trying to do this on a Monday morning...

Still, you can't deny that KD won't score seven or more points more for the Thunder than Manning will have completions in the next Super Bow, now can you?
kmumf
kmumf
Joined: Jul 5, 2011
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 176
January 23rd, 2017 at 12:53:50 PM permalink
Yeah we always hope to find those dream bets! I am a big 0 winner for any bets this year oh well.
DRich
DRich
Joined: Jul 6, 2012
  • Threads: 63
  • Posts: 3293
January 23rd, 2017 at 1:36:02 PM permalink
Quote: ThatDonGuy

Quick - somebody head to the Westgate; if this is not a misprint on ESPN's part (which it probably is), this is the Ultra Mega Hyper Extreme AP Of The Decade.

ESPN lists one of Westgate's props as follows:

WHO WILL HAVE MORE:
**(Thunder/Warriors -- Feb. 6); prop closes at 6:05 p.m. PT

KEVIN DURANT (OKC) POINTS -6.5 -110
PEYTON MANNING (DEN) COMPLETIONS +6.5 -110

If the bet appears this way at the Westgate, bet the house, the car, the farm, and the things (especially the things) on Manning - then, after the Thunder-Warriors game on 2/6, point out that the bet clearly says "Kevin Durant (OKC)" and no one named Kevin Durant plays for the Thunder as he plays for the Warriors now...

Even if Manning is hurt, his bet is +6.5.



Lol, Peyton Manning is retired. This is definitely from last year.
djatc
djatc
Joined: Jan 15, 2013
  • Threads: 80
  • Posts: 3631
January 23rd, 2017 at 1:42:41 PM permalink
Chicken parm you taste so good

Payton manning lost my roll

Last year was a time for dabs

Defense wins the Super bowl

Who among you is Fenwick?


Read all that in the nationwide song
They asked me how well I understood theoretical physics. I said I had a theoretical degree in physics. They said welcome aboard.
Ayecarumba
Ayecarumba
Joined: Nov 17, 2009
  • Threads: 206
  • Posts: 5398
January 23rd, 2017 at 2:40:51 PM permalink
Quote: djatc

...Who among you is Fenwick?



hehe... "I am Fenwick!"

Opening lines:

Pats -3; O/U 59
America is all about speed. Hot, nasty, bad-ass speed. - Eleanor Roosevelt, 1936
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 978
  • Posts: 16487
January 28th, 2017 at 12:09:10 PM permalink
Here is my crude handicapping of the Super Bowl.

In the 2016 regular season the Patriots scored 27.56 points per game and gave up 15.625
Atlanta scored 33.75 per game and gave up 25.375

My estimated points of points scored by the Patriots is the average of 27.56 and 25.375, which equals 26.47.
For the Falcons it is (33.75+15.625)/2 = 24.69.

So, the Patriots should win by 1.78 points and the total points scored should be 51.16.

The over/under on the actual game is 58 to 59. I've never seen my method be so off before. This makes the under look like a great bet. However, it makes me think that I'm missing something.

It also makes the Falcons +3 look like a good, but not great, bet. I hear the sharp action is on the Patriots. Again, makes me think I'm missing something.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
WatchMeWin
WatchMeWin
Joined: May 20, 2011
  • Threads: 47
  • Posts: 585
January 28th, 2017 at 12:30:27 PM permalink
Quote: Wizard

Here is my crude handicapping of the Super Bowl.

In the 2016 regular season the Patriots scored 27.56 points per game and gave up 15.625
Atlanta scored 33.75 per game and gave up 25.375

My estimated points of points scored by the Patriots is the average of 27.56 and 25.375, which equals 26.47.
For the Falcons it is (33.75+15.625)/2 = 24.69.

So, the Patriots should win by 1.78 points and the total points scored should be 51.16.

The over/under on the actual game is 58 to 59. I've never seen my method be so off before. This makes the under look like a great bet. However, it makes me think that I'm missing something.

It also makes the Falcons +3 look like a good, but not great, bet. I hear the sharp action is on the Patriots. Again, makes me think I'm missing something.



Hey Wizard, When you mention that you hear the sharp action is on the Patriots... Have you heard the the same sharps actions on previous games, and if so, how did they do? I am going back and forth with this game ... Im favoring Atlanta and the under... but I can make cases on every direction. Its really a tough one, in my opinion. Im looking for some good insight. If the sharps have been on point in the past, then I will lead toward their opinion.

Im in a pool with about 40 people. The pool is up to 40k. Ive been in first place for about a month as I took a large lead early... but the past two weeks allowed all of the favorite/over parlay guys to rack up huge points, and now it is a close race. I feel everyone will take the favorite and over again, so I could probably take those picks and preserve the win, as we will all win or lose together... but I still want to pick the winners.

Thanks!
'Winners hit n run... Losers stick around'
SOOPOO
SOOPOO
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 89
  • Posts: 3976
January 28th, 2017 at 1:38:16 PM permalink
Quote: Wizard

Here is my crude handicapping of the Super Bowl.

In the 2016 regular season the Patriots scored 27.56 points per game and gave up 15.625
Atlanta scored 33.75 per game and gave up 25.375

My estimated points of points scored by the Patriots is the average of 27.56 and 25.375, which equals 26.47.
For the Falcons it is (33.75+15.625)/2 = 24.69.

So, the Patriots should win by 1.78 points and the total points scored should be 51.16.

The over/under on the actual game is 58 to 59. I've never seen my method be so off before. This makes the under look like a great bet. However, it makes me think that I'm missing something.

It also makes the Falcons +3 look like a good, but not great, bet. I hear the sharp action is on the Patriots. Again, makes me think I'm missing something.



The Patriots were SHUT OUT against the Bills (I think!) without Tom Brady. I would not even count the 4 games played without him as Patriot football games.
Mission146
Administrator
Mission146
Joined: May 15, 2012
  • Threads: 104
  • Posts: 9427
January 28th, 2017 at 3:20:58 PM permalink
Quote: Wizard

Here is my crude handicapping of the Super Bowl.

In the 2016 regular season the Patriots scored 27.56 points per game and gave up 15.625
Atlanta scored 33.75 per game and gave up 25.375

My estimated points of points scored by the Patriots is the average of 27.56 and 25.375, which equals 26.47.
For the Falcons it is (33.75+15.625)/2 = 24.69.

So, the Patriots should win by 1.78 points and the total points scored should be 51.16.

The over/under on the actual game is 58 to 59. I've never seen my method be so off before. This makes the under look like a great bet. However, it makes me think that I'm missing something.

It also makes the Falcons +3 look like a good, but not great, bet. I hear the sharp action is on the Patriots. Again, makes me think I'm missing something.



That's MY patented crude method! JK. It is pretty close to what I use, though, but I tend to go with point differential which would work like this:

The Patriots scored 27.56 points per game whereas Atlanta scored 33.75 per game, thus, Atlanta -6.19.

The Patriots allowed 15.625 per game whereas Atlanta allowed 25.375 per game, thus, New England -9.75

The difference of the differentials is 9.75 - 6.19 is New England -3.56 making New England (-3) a decent, but not great bet. If nothing else, I'm getting the Push if they win on by a Field Goal and that should be a loss for me, so that's pretty big. If I can get that Laying less than 110 to win 100, then all the better. CG Technology is or was -105 if that is still the case and 5Dimes was apparently NE -3 @ -101 at one point.

One could also make the argument that NE having the league's best defense in terms of Points Allowed also somewhat negates Atlanta's more powerful (points scored) offense thereby making New England the better bet still, but I don't necessarily subscribe to that argument. The reason I don't buy into that, even though, 'Defense wins championships,' is because one can argue that the Falcons have not gone up against defenses as strong as the Patriots typically, but then, it is also true that the Patriots have not gone up against offenses as strong as that of the Falcons.

If we look at the Falcons against the top fifteen scoring defenses in the league, they put up:

24, 23, 24, 28, 15, 38, 28, 36 (Playoffs Included) for an average of: 27 Points

With that, it is clear that they benefitted (in terms of average) by pounding on weaker defenses. Now, let's look at NE against the Top 15 scoring teams in terms of points scored:

21, 16, 16, 25, 17 (Playoffs Included) for an average of: 19 Points

By this metric, not surprisingly, Atlanta tends to perform somewhat (6.75 points) worse in scoring against good defenses and the Patriots (3.375) tend to allow better offenses, which they haven't played often, to score more.

While this would seem to benefit the UNDER greatly, let us not forget that New England absolutely punishes bad scoring defenses, which the Falcons certainly have, here is New England's scoring against the worst fifteen teams in the league in terms of points allowed with Brady in action:

33, 30, 22, 26, 41, 35 (Playoffs N/A) for an average of: 31.17 Points

When we combine what Atlanta does against GOOD defenses with what New England does to BAD defenses, then we end up with a game total of just over 58 points, making the UNDER not a very good bet given one has to lay 110 to win 100. Again, the sample sizes are limited, but we do know NE punishes awful defenses and NE has not faced an offense even remotely as powerful as that of ATL.

In other words, I think the line on Over/Under is pretty close to correct with no advantage on either side.

ATL is far and away the best offensive team in the league whereas New England allows the fewest points in the league, so neither team has played any other team even remotely like this. Atlanta's offense, however, seems to swing about 6.75 points to the bad against good defenses whereas the scoring allowed by New England seems to swing 3.375 points to the bad. While the sample size is limited, that seems to benefit NE by a little over three points.

Combined with the, 'Fundamental Point Differential,' it seems that playing against a bad defense boosts NE by about four points, playing against a good defense hurts ATL by nearly seven points AND playing against a good offense hurts NE by about 3.5 points. Combining these factors with the fundamental points differential seems to STRONGLY favor NE, especially when we consider what that defense has done against teams who have had to play from behind (meaning they are throwing a ton) and playing a more volatile style that should fundamentally lead to more scoring.

Even trying to be as objective as possible, NE -3 looks FANTASTIC, my only reservation is we have not seen that defense against many good offenses, and certainly, not against a scoring team such as ATL who has put up 5.1 more per game than the nearest competition and six per game more than the Pats.
Vultures can't be choosers.
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 978
  • Posts: 16487
January 28th, 2017 at 6:11:20 PM permalink
Thanks for your comments. I was downtown this afternoon thinking about betting the Falcons at the Golden Nugget, who had the best lines for them in Vegas. As I was staring at the board I saw a couple professional sports bettors down there I have a lot of respect for. I'm not sure I should say who. Both of them liked the Patriots and the under. I'm still hesitant to bet the Patriots but I definitely like the under.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.

  • Jump to: