Bad Pix/Bad Weather/Good Omens?
Well, last week I said I probably wasn't going to bet any of the playoff games, and I haven't--yet. I don't think I'm going to either. There are too many teams I either like (Bears), feel semi-obliged to root for (Pats), as well as the hugely sentimental favorite (Saints), so I prefer to sit back and let things unfold without having anything extra at stake.
Especially when I keep getting my picks wrong anyway. (1-5 playoffs--ick!)
The conventional wisdom when handicapping playoff games is to not pick underdogs unless you think they can win outright. Usually this works. This runs contrary to te regular season conventional wisdom, which says that favorites tend to be overvalued, hence underdogs tend to be a better bet. Ironically, favorites in the playoffs are probably more overvalued, because the linesmakers have to account for the fact that with much fewer games each week, these games will get much more action. Linesmakers need to inflate the spreads to keep the action from going too strongly for the favorites. They are potentially a couple of blowouts away from getting killed.
So why does it tend to work out to pick favorites in the playoffs? My theory is that the best teams tend to bring their best game when something is at stake, when it is win or go home. Their wins will tend to be by more than the spread because they will do their best to bury the other team, if only to ensure that they make the next round.
This year the favorites have won every NFC game, but none of them have covered. You can see the problem this poses for the conventional wisdom regarding playoff games. My current theory is that the "pick the winner to cover outright" theory only works for good teams, and the NFC teams are not that good.
My initial reaction upon hearing the spreads for last weeks games was that neither the Bears nor the Saints should be favored by their resepctive 9 or 5.5 points. In addition to the conventional wisdom that says to go with the winners in the playoffs, I also read that the home teams/bye teams in the second round have won something like 81% of games played since the NFL went to the current playoff format. I'm not sure how many of these teams covered, but according to the theory it should be a significant majority of them. So I end up convincing myself that a fresh Saints team could blow out a weary Eagles team. I probably would have ended up taking the Bears, despite the fact that their defense Has been giving up plenty of points lately (20+ for the last 6 games) if not for the rumors that Rex Grossman routinely inhales lines that could circumnavigate Soldier field.
I still like the Bears at home against Seattle better than the Steelers at a neutral site, particularly a dome, provided that they are playing well...
But maybe I'm just biased. The Bears have been my second favorite NFL team for a long time....
Meanwhile, the Saints look like a team of destiny, and I can't say that I'd be upset if they beat the Bears today. It reminds me of the 1986 World Series. The Mets were my second favorite MLB team, but I would've been Happy for Boston and the Red Sox if they had won, and it was sad that they lost the way they did. I suppose in the end it made the 2004 season, complete with the greatest comeback ever against the hated Yankees all the sweeter.
I suppose if the Saints won in a couple of years it would still be pretty sweet, but nothing could top them winning this year, after they were exiled for a year by hurricane Katerina. Like they say, you couldn't write this stuff.
But there's a problem. Whoever wins between the Bears and the Saints will still have to face Indianapolis or New England.
I don't see the Bears beating either of these teams. They might have a shot if they were at home, especially against a dome team like the Colts, but on a neutral site, with decent weather? Doubtful. Their defense has been less reliable than their quarterback, of late. Where does that leave them?
This week it leaves them relying on (at the moment) lets see....29 degree weather, a 13 mph wind, and snow/freezing rain. Currently we are 4 hours before kickoff. Wow. I feel like the weather is about to talk me into taking the Bears. Sunset will be at 4:52 p.m., or about the end of the game.
The Saints went over 200 yards on the ground last week. If they can be effective on the ground the weather might not bother them too much. Still....freezing rain?
There are times to take the road team in the playoffs. This might be one of them, especially given the vulnerability Chicago has shown. Still, it's looking like Bear weather. I'm not betting, but Chicago 24, New Orleans 21 feels about right. So does 27-24. The Bears are favored by 2.5, so I guess that's a pick for them.
Meanwhile, I'm wondering if Bill Belichek has figured out that the Colts haven't been blowing teams out this year, so he can afford to be patient on offense. (Or can he? Everything I've been reading about the Pats has them vulnerable defensively, so maybe ol' Bill has a reason to be in panic mode. Still, the Colts have only two touchdowns so for in the playoffs. Meanwhile, Adam Vinatieri has 8 field goals. Thats why I'm saying Indianapolis 26, New England 24. Is 12 field goals a playoff record? Since the Colts are favored by 3, that was a pick for the Pats. And Adam Vinatieri. Incidentally, the Accuscore computer picks Indianapolis, 23-21. Since this is based on an average of a bunch of simulations, I'm assuming the computer didn't pick this score with number 4's leg in mind, but I like this score too.
Oh yeah, I forgot to mention my omen. I was in the motorpool two days ago when I found a winter hat. With a New England Patriots logo on it. Does this bode well or ill for the Pats? When I buy team's paraphanalia they tend to lose their next playoff game, or to have just lost a playoff game. I found a Bears winter hat once, but it took them two more years to make the playoffs, then lose to Carolina, so as omens go, that one may not have applied. Hmmm.... Where's my psychic friend when I need her?...
Especially when I keep getting my picks wrong anyway. (1-5 playoffs--ick!)
The conventional wisdom when handicapping playoff games is to not pick underdogs unless you think they can win outright. Usually this works. This runs contrary to te regular season conventional wisdom, which says that favorites tend to be overvalued, hence underdogs tend to be a better bet. Ironically, favorites in the playoffs are probably more overvalued, because the linesmakers have to account for the fact that with much fewer games each week, these games will get much more action. Linesmakers need to inflate the spreads to keep the action from going too strongly for the favorites. They are potentially a couple of blowouts away from getting killed.
So why does it tend to work out to pick favorites in the playoffs? My theory is that the best teams tend to bring their best game when something is at stake, when it is win or go home. Their wins will tend to be by more than the spread because they will do their best to bury the other team, if only to ensure that they make the next round.
This year the favorites have won every NFC game, but none of them have covered. You can see the problem this poses for the conventional wisdom regarding playoff games. My current theory is that the "pick the winner to cover outright" theory only works for good teams, and the NFC teams are not that good.
My initial reaction upon hearing the spreads for last weeks games was that neither the Bears nor the Saints should be favored by their resepctive 9 or 5.5 points. In addition to the conventional wisdom that says to go with the winners in the playoffs, I also read that the home teams/bye teams in the second round have won something like 81% of games played since the NFL went to the current playoff format. I'm not sure how many of these teams covered, but according to the theory it should be a significant majority of them. So I end up convincing myself that a fresh Saints team could blow out a weary Eagles team. I probably would have ended up taking the Bears, despite the fact that their defense Has been giving up plenty of points lately (20+ for the last 6 games) if not for the rumors that Rex Grossman routinely inhales lines that could circumnavigate Soldier field.
I still like the Bears at home against Seattle better than the Steelers at a neutral site, particularly a dome, provided that they are playing well...
But maybe I'm just biased. The Bears have been my second favorite NFL team for a long time....
Meanwhile, the Saints look like a team of destiny, and I can't say that I'd be upset if they beat the Bears today. It reminds me of the 1986 World Series. The Mets were my second favorite MLB team, but I would've been Happy for Boston and the Red Sox if they had won, and it was sad that they lost the way they did. I suppose in the end it made the 2004 season, complete with the greatest comeback ever against the hated Yankees all the sweeter.
I suppose if the Saints won in a couple of years it would still be pretty sweet, but nothing could top them winning this year, after they were exiled for a year by hurricane Katerina. Like they say, you couldn't write this stuff.
But there's a problem. Whoever wins between the Bears and the Saints will still have to face Indianapolis or New England.
I don't see the Bears beating either of these teams. They might have a shot if they were at home, especially against a dome team like the Colts, but on a neutral site, with decent weather? Doubtful. Their defense has been less reliable than their quarterback, of late. Where does that leave them?
This week it leaves them relying on (at the moment) lets see....29 degree weather, a 13 mph wind, and snow/freezing rain. Currently we are 4 hours before kickoff. Wow. I feel like the weather is about to talk me into taking the Bears. Sunset will be at 4:52 p.m., or about the end of the game.
The Saints went over 200 yards on the ground last week. If they can be effective on the ground the weather might not bother them too much. Still....freezing rain?
There are times to take the road team in the playoffs. This might be one of them, especially given the vulnerability Chicago has shown. Still, it's looking like Bear weather. I'm not betting, but Chicago 24, New Orleans 21 feels about right. So does 27-24. The Bears are favored by 2.5, so I guess that's a pick for them.
Meanwhile, I'm wondering if Bill Belichek has figured out that the Colts haven't been blowing teams out this year, so he can afford to be patient on offense. (Or can he? Everything I've been reading about the Pats has them vulnerable defensively, so maybe ol' Bill has a reason to be in panic mode. Still, the Colts have only two touchdowns so for in the playoffs. Meanwhile, Adam Vinatieri has 8 field goals. Thats why I'm saying Indianapolis 26, New England 24. Is 12 field goals a playoff record? Since the Colts are favored by 3, that was a pick for the Pats. And Adam Vinatieri. Incidentally, the Accuscore computer picks Indianapolis, 23-21. Since this is based on an average of a bunch of simulations, I'm assuming the computer didn't pick this score with number 4's leg in mind, but I like this score too.
Oh yeah, I forgot to mention my omen. I was in the motorpool two days ago when I found a winter hat. With a New England Patriots logo on it. Does this bode well or ill for the Pats? When I buy team's paraphanalia they tend to lose their next playoff game, or to have just lost a playoff game. I found a Bears winter hat once, but it took them two more years to make the playoffs, then lose to Carolina, so as omens go, that one may not have applied. Hmmm.... Where's my psychic friend when I need her?...
posted by roQQ | 5:06 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home