The NFL regular season has ended, and it's finally time to review our noble experiment with NFL win total bets. Let's start with the conclusion: as we had hoped, this is a great way to bet on the NFL. While probably not as profitable over the long term as MLB win total bets based on PECOTA and other projections, I think it's possible to win over the long term using the DVOA-based projections from the Pro Football Prospectus published by the guys at Football Outsiders, along with a little common sense. So let's look at all of the projections we considered, both the ones we played and the ones we avoided. As you may remember, we looked for any teams where the win total lines and the PFP projections differed by 1.5 wins or more.
Baltimore Ravens- PFP: 8.5 wins. Line: Over 6.0 -115. Actual Win Total: 11.
We played the over on this one for a 3 unit profit. This was an easy money play on par with the Rays Over bets from lasr year. PFP had no way of knowing that Joe Flacco was going to be as good as he was, but this team would have won more than 6 games with little Hambone Jr. at QB. They might struggle with fitting him for a helmet, though.
Carolina Panthers- PFP: 9.5 wins. Line: Over 7.5 -160. Actual Win Total: 12.
Two home runs. But two is not a trend. And we didn't play it because of the huge juice, because we're pussies. Moving on ...
Cleveland Browns- PFP: 6.3 wins. Line: Under 8 +110. Actual Win Total: 4.
Hmmm. Think these nerdy stat guys might be on to something here. We passed here because there was only a 1.7 win disparity, and we thought the Derek Anderson variable was too much of a wildcard. Next season we'll know better.
Dallas Cowboys- PFP: 8.1 wins. Line: Under 10.5 +110. Actual Win Total: 9.
Actual win total: 9. Perceived win total: 3. Good times, good times. We took this one for a tidy 3.15 unit profit. We started out playing it for five units because this was the perfect storm of overvaulation, but pussied out- a recurring theme, apparently. Once again, next season we'll know better. 3.15units is a decent payday, though.
Detroit Lions- PFP: 4.3 wins. Line: Under 6.5 +110. Actual Win Total: Zero.
Wow. This one was over before Rosh Hashanah. I'm not even sure what to say. I'd love to go back and review my Pro Football Prospectus to see what they were saying to justify their Lion-trashing, but my fiancee used it as a paint can stand last weekend, and now it's covered in something called Column Beige. 3 unit profit for us here, although I feel kind of dirty about it, like that banker in the movie Inside Man who made his fortune off the Holocaust.
Green Bay Packers- PFP: 11.4 wins. Line: Over 8.0 -130. Actual Win Total: 6.
And here we find the exception that proves the rule, as well as the "Ugly" referenced in the title of this post. We took a huge 5.2 unit loss on this play, our biggest one of the year. But I maintain that it was the value play. The Pack outscored their opponents by 39 points. They had the extreme misfortune of drawing the AFC and NFC South in the out-of-division game rotation. Swap the Cowboys game and the Houston game on their schedule, and I think that move alone would get them to eight wins (both were Lambeau Field losses that came as the visitors were at the peak of rollercoaster seasons). Mix in all the close losses and blowout wins, and you conclude that this is a 9-10 win team. They'll win this money back for us next season.
Minnesota Vikings- PFP: 10.1 wins. Line: Over 8.5 -125. Actual Win Total: 10.
Another pass by us, another lost profit. Once again, the public overestimates the value of QB play and underestimates the value of line play. By the way, in case you're not counting, Football Outsiders is now 6-1 against Vegas where there's a disparity of 1.5 games or more. I think we're on to something.
Oakland Raiders- PFP: 3.9 wins. Line: Under 6.5 -150. Actual Win Total 5.
Make that 7-1. And once again, we're pussies. We gotta get over this fear of juice. Sure it affects the value of a given bet, but if there's still value, there's still value, even if it's expensive value.
Philadelphia Eagles- PFP: 11.7 wins. Line: Over 8.5 -160. Actual Win Total: 9.
See the above paragraph, changing "7-1" to "8-1." Christ these guys are good.
Pittsburgh Steelers- PFP: 7.2 wins. Line: Under 9 -105. Actual Win Total: 12.
Score one for the pussies! PFP is now 8-2. Amateurs. (In all seriousness, I continue to think that PFP's numbers overvalue strength of schedule, which was my reason for passing on this one. The Steelers were judged to have the toughest schedule in football, and it didn't really turn out that way).
Seattle Seahawks- PFP: 10.5 wins. Line: Over 8.5 -165. Actual Win Total: 4.
See above (their schedule was ranked 24th). Although I think you have to give the Outsiders a pass here. The book comes out early in the preseason. I think if you had told them that the Seahawks would be scouring the Seattle-area flag football leagues for guys to start at WR as the season began, they would have revised their projections downward a bit.
Tampa Bay Buccaneers- PFP: 10.5 wins. Line: Over 8 -130. Actual Win Total: 9.
This one hit for us for 2 units back in November. The Bucs then proceeded to lose their remaining games to make it look a lot closer than it was. Odd. But the money's still green.
Review: Using what I'll call the PFP System- if you had bet on any team with a win disparity of 1.5 or greater, with no adjustments for strength of schedule or considerations of the juice- you would have gone 9-3. That is outstanding. What's more, all three of the misses can be "explained" in one way or another. The Packers' losing season, as I discussed at length, was a bit of an anomaly. The other two misses were teams where the disparity was less than 2 games and the teams had extreme SOS rankings. But these sorts of variations will always happen. 9-3 is about as good as you can get. Let's just hope the books don't catch on to this. They don't seem to have picked up on PECOTA yet, although I have my concerns for the 2009 MLB season.
Our Profit: 5.95 Units. Damn that 5.2 unit play on the Packers. Total lack of discipline on our part. Can't speak for Hambone, but I think I wanted to adopt a "second team" for the season, and the Pack, with their likeable post-Favre story, were a great candidate. So I put too many eggs in this basket. Still, 5.95 units is a quality payday. And more importantly, it puts us in the black for the NFL season, something I personally never thought possible. I've always thought the NFL was the toughest nut to crack. We promise we won't sit on it to ensure a profit, though. Look for our playoff picks later this week.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Two questions:
1. Was the Ravens comment about my son and fitting in a helmet meant to suggest that they wouldn't have a helmet small enough for a 3-month-old, or that because he's my son his head is probably too enormous for a standard helmet?
2. The Lions disaster season prompted not one, but TWO Jewish references. Do you believe the Lions to be suffering some form of of oppression or just wandering in the proverbial desert? Are the Leonists going to try and establish Detroit as its own separate country now? Should I stop before I get myself blacklisted in Hollywood?
1. The comment was meant to suggest that your son would also have a huge head. I meant to go back and put you in as the Ravens QB, which makes the joke work better I think. Too late.
2. Calling the Holocaust as a "Jewish" reference is a horribly offensive slight to the fine gypsy people of Eastern Europe who were completely eradicated by the Nazis. Show some respect for the gypsies, Borat.
Post a Comment