Off season discussion

We ended the season strong, after starting it pretty badly.....ONLY SIX MONTHS UNTIL THE SEASON STARTS!...lol.

Everyone is an expert in the offseason, and it is ok to disagree without taking things personal. I've talked about this before....in sports betting you should want people to disagree with you!....it gives you better lines and ups your profit return on investment.

Remember, only 4% of sports bettors make money, so if you have the same opinion as everyone else, odds are you will be a loser.

One thing I have discussed with a betting colleague recently is if you are betting dogs, you will be more successful if you bet them moneyline rather than point spread.

We use a database that goes back to 1989 for the regular season,....we try to match current situations with the past...it's called technical handicapping...probably 90% of bettors are fundamental handicappers and 10% are technical cappers.  The equivalent in the stock marekt is a fundamental handicapper will look at stock reports, profit earnings, projections, etc., to decide to buy, sell or hold.  A technical handicapper will read and evaluate a stock chart and make an assessment that way.  Either can make or lose money equally well, it is how your brain is wired that you will feel comfortable with one method or another.

When using query computer language we enter in parameters into the database and it spits out results of how that performed in the past using killersports or gimmethedog.  When making one parameter that our play on team is an underdog, when those parameters spit out bunch of past results,...say at least 20 results and our underdog covers at a rate  60%, those teams cover by an average of about 2.5 points, and they will win straight up 40-43% of the time.

When calculating what would be the most profitable approach, it is almost EVERY TIME, more profitable to play the moneyline, over a large amount of time, versus the point spread when finding queries that hit at a rate of 60% of greater, and most, but not all times that profit is 100% greater taking the moneyline, versus the point spread.   

I recently calculated one very good query that indicated taking away underdogs that had been successful since 1989.....I found that it had made 355 units of profit in that time playing the moneyline and between 190-200 units of profit taking that team on  the point spread.

We have on this site former bookies, and when they get into this topic, they without exception, will say they fear a bettor that bets underdog moneylines, much more than a point spread bettor.

So, why haven't I done it?....no excuses,......this is the year I bite the bullet and do so.

And in the news.....Russell Wilson signs with the Steelers....the Steelers will be tough this season...new coordinator and new qb (probably) to go along with that very good defense.  Too bad they are playing in a REALLY tough division.  Won't bet any futures on them, but I am high on the Steelers.

And, in my go-against the grain opinion, almost everyone thinks that Justin Fields will go to the Falcons, which is fine, it is probably a good place for him.  I think the Vikings should cut bait with Cousins and sign Fields.

Absurd???!!!   

Totally non-risky move...they can coach him up like he hasn't been, and if he sucks you release him next season...it costs you what?...is it 4 million?.....not 40 million that Cousins will get.  The Vikings won't do it, and no one else will agree with me.  Put me in charge of the Vikings for a year, and if they go 2-15 with Fields as their quarterback and me as your general manager you can fire the both of us.....lol.  That'd be similar to what he Vikings did after Bud Grant retired....they hired a former marine, Les Steckel as Grant's replacement, who ran his training camp like a marine corps boot camp, the only problem was, he couldn't coach a lick....the Vikings went 2-14 that year, they fired Steckel and rehired Bud Grant for one year to right the ship.

The Vikings after Grant retired a second time hired Jerry Burns, and in astute moves got a lot of USFL players who were good like Anthony Carter, etc.  In one season, they made the wildcard, beat NO and SF on the road in the playoffs and played the Redskins with the Hogs and John Riggins.  Redskins were winning 17-10 late in the 4th quarter and the Vikings drove inside the Redskins 10.  On fourth and four with a minute remaining at the six yard line in the last minute, Darrin Nelson dropped a pass in the end zone that would have tied the game.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsUzNSm8Amw&ab_channel=NFLThrowback

The Redskins ended up cruising in the Super Bowl, as the Vikings once again were the second best team in the league. 

Got a feeling this thread will become very popular by season's opening. Some things that cross my mind at this time are:

1. That the prop market will become drastically more relevant as VALUE can be identified easier. A potential problem could be

     wager limits being small.

2.   With 2 team teasers being exposed as a player friendly wager (ROI wise) ,the books making these more expensive. I guess Wong was right.

     I have been optimistic with heading down that road and aggressively deploying capital with (regressive anchor 2 team teasers)

3.  I am stubbornly sticking to developing a metric for (LOS) line of scrimmage as a tool to use in historical technical analysis.

4.  Hoping to isolate some gold from SDQL querries and paying attention to geopolitical chaos and it's effect on players' performances, I believe

    outstanding season long sustained form will be adversely affected.

Would love to see the Raiders pick up Cousins!! Would remind me of Rich Gannon coming in years ago , the perfect veteran to come in

Nice to hear from you.....if we're serious about winning, we are constantly looking for a way to increase our effectiveness as bettors.

For you it's using  teasers, evidently.  

For me, it is that I will be playing moneyline dogs, and perhaps I'll use my right brain a bit more than I have.

I do have some CFL queries that I recently discovered which have some very good historical basis....no worries that you don't play CFL.

@jowchoo

 Prop lines are getting much sharper

As betting becomes legal we see the youth movement in sports betting...and youth love prop bets

Also notice the exploding popularity of same-game parlays and the "Boosted-odds bets" 

Books have taken notice and spend way more time on these bets than 5-10 years ago

Cousins goes to Atlanta, I would expect his first couple of years they'll contend for the division....after that not so confident after that that his body will hold up....he is one of the last statues playing quarterback in the NFL....he'll have an excellent line in front of him, which will help.....a lot will depend on how good his offensive coordinator is who coached under McVey for the Rams.  If he is like Biennemy, Hackett of the Jets or Nagy of the Chiefs/Bears, it won't be pretty, as offensive coordinators can look great when they are under a very good, offensive minded head coach, versus when they become the man, it can fall apart.

Indigo line to win the division and regular season wins

Falcons +170.........9,   -110

Saints +200..........8,   -120

Bucs +200........... 8,   -120

Panthers +400......6,   -110

In the AFC North to win division and regular season wins.....

Ravens  +140.........10.5, +110

Steelers +220.........9,     +120

Bengals +250.........8.5,   -110

Browns +250.........  8,    -120

Cousins signing leaves not a lot of places for Justin Fields to go with the expectation that he would compete for a starting position.

@ricraider

If I were Cousins I would have picked the Raiders over the Falcons....they are building a culture there and I expect big things out of them in the future....only issue is that their division will have the two best coaches in the league to go against and the third one has won a Super Bowl with the Saints.

Good points BH.

One of the worst loses I had this past season was taking the Patriots +2.5 versus the Raiders.....down 2 points in the last couple of minutes inside their own 10 yard line, Jones  throws a dime 40 yards down the field that is dropped, and within the next play or two Jones takes a sack for a  safety to lose my cover.

As they say in spanish "Hor-reee'-blay" (Horrible).

Patriots might have to sink into the abyss for a couple of seasons before they ascend again, buddy.

I would hope that the Vikings would not expect fans to think that running Sam Darnold out onto the field as your quarterback in an NFL game is acceptable.....Flacco or Brissett both would have been much, much better.

That being said, the Vikings had Nick Mullens and Joshua Dobbs play quarterback for them last season and they won some games with them.  Nick Mullens at times looked like a very good quarterback, except for his habit of throwing the ball to the wrong team, which is a dealbreaker in the NFL.

Almost certainly they will draft a quarterback, and if they don't trade up they will probably get Nix from Oregon or Penix from Washington.

@Indigo999

 Yup. I thought Dobbs flashed enough last year to be given some consideration. Too bad for Jefferson who is arguably the most TALENTED wideout in the game

Penix makes sense to vikes.

Be interesting to see if Mccarthy goes top 10 or if den/min/lv trade up to get him

Well, it is looking likely the Vikings are planning on making a run at the 3rd or 4th best quarterback in the draft, unless the Vikings offer an insane package to the Patriots, which would probably require two number ones and a number two going to New England....if I am NE I take that offer in a heartbeat.

I wouldn't trade up.....I don't get the love for McCarthy of Michigan......how is he better than Penix or Nix?....he was good at handing off and watching Michigan grind teams to a pulp, but he has not proven that he can bring a team back from deficit or win a game with his arm.....and generally I would take a Pac 12 qb over a Big 10 quarterback if everything else is kinda close, every time.  Joe Montana and Tom Brady were not number draft picks and neither was Brock Purdy for that matter...for every C.J. Stroud there are two or three Zach Wilsons.....drafting is an inexact science.....if you're picking at 11th or 12th, you are not guaranteed to get a worse player than getting in at the 3rd or 5th position of the draft.

On another note.....

DraftKings has the Steelers at +950 to win their division and the Lions at +160, both of which are playable.

Falcons are -125 to win their division, which is not playable.

@Indigo999

 Joe Montana and Tom Brady were not number one draft picks"

Chiefs are -210 to win their division.....

if some sportsbook offered "Chiefs to NOT win their division" at +170, I would take it.

Fields gets traded to the Steelers for a not-so-great draft pick.

His career is on the brink...he'll have a year or possibly two  to prove he can be an NFL quarterback and he might be spending most of that time on the bench. 

Russell Wilson will be 37 years old in two years, and he has not aged well in comparison to other qbs....both of them on are very low salaries this season,....30+ million less than what a lot of teams are paying ONE quarterback, so it is a low risk, possibly high reward that one of them will work out for the Steelers....it is very astute what the Steelers have done.  If Wilson doesn't excel in 2024, in 2025 when he would command 30+ million as a starting quarterback they can cut him.

The Steelers and the Bears will be the two most fascinating teams to watch in 20024.

Here is an angle that has produced almost 62% winners since 1989.  The past two seasons it has been a loser.  I've mentioned before how last season was a very unusual season for technical handicappers in the NFL.

1)  We take an underdog that will be favored their next game versus their present opponent who will be an underdog.

Results:

  a)  Home dogs......71-44-3 ATS, 61.7%, (+3.50), 60-58 straight up

  b)  Away dogs......587-361-19 ATS, 61.9%, (3.40), 459-506-2 straight up, 47.6% 

Now, if our dog is say +2.5 in their game and they win that game 38-0, they may not be a dog their next game, as the lookahead line can change based on this week's results.

We can change our angle to denote that our team should be at least a three point favorite their next game, as lookahead lines do not change more than 3 points based on last week's results.

The results in doing so, stipulating our underdog will be at least a 3 point favorite and their present opponent will be at least a three point underdog....

  a)  home dogs 34-20-2 (+4.88) ATS, 30-28 straight up

  b)  away dogs 350-211-12 (+3.76) ATS, 280-293-0 straight up, 48.9%

2)  An NFL underdog that will be favored their next two games....790-570-33 against the spread, (+2.37), 58.1%, 607-784-4 straight up, 43.7%

3) An NFL underdog whose present opponent will be an underdog their next two games.....782-502-35 against the spread (+3.46), 60.9%, 612-703 Straight up, 46.5% 

4)  In weeks 1-3 an away dog of less than 7 points who had the lesser record the previous season as long as their opponent didn't win greater than 8 games more..........182-127-13 ATS (+2.56), 58.9%

5)  A week 1 away dog that won more regular season games the previous season than their present opponent....31-49-6 ATS (-2.95)

6)  An underdog before week 11 who will either be at least a 3 point favorite their next game, OR their present opponent (the favorite) will be at least a 3 point underdog...... 

  a)  home dog.....293-197-19 ATS (+3.20), 59.8%

  b)  away dog......1123-804-58 ATS (+2.11), 58.3%

@Indigo999

 Thank you for these. Care to share your querry text? I understand if the answer is no!

Putting some final touches on my thoughts as to why I believe regression handicapping is a must tool in long term nfl success,

especially when combined with the insurance of extra points offered with teasers. The value of these points drastically increases when the

total in a potential game wager is LOW! Some books have sussed this out and have increased the vig ;-(

As the modern game evolves some historical successes go away and some new ones emerge. The large sample sizes previously coveted  can be replaced

imo by smaller new  modern trends sample sizes. Vegas has and will always misplace some values on certain conditions , this can be gleaned with SDQL

historical analysis and when they are discovered it is glorious. Back later with more specific data.