Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Mucks Power Rankings -- Week 6


muck
 Share

Recommended Posts

Top / Bottom 5 Passing Offenses

128.5 -- New Orleans

120.1 -- Oakland

119.9 -- Dallas

116.9 -- Detroit

114.7 -- Cleveland

...

 

87.2 -- Kansas City

86.6 -- Miami

85.7 -- San Francisco

83.4 -- Houston

70.3 -- Seattle

 

Top / Bottom 5 Rushing Offenses

142.0 -- San Francisco

135.3 -- Seattle

130.1 -- Houston

128.6 -- Washington

126.2 -- New England

..........

 

 

71.0 -- Cleveland

70.6 -- Tennessee

69.7 -- Dallas

65.1 -- Oakland

63.9 -- New Orleans

 

Top / Bottom 5 Overall Offenses (which is more than just an average of rushing / passing scores)

116.5 -- New England

116.0 -- San Francisco

113.9 -- NY Giants

110.6 -- Houston

109.3 -- Atlanta

............

 

90.2 -- Dallas

88.1 -- Arizona

87.5 -- Oakland

87.4 -- Tennessee

85.0 -- Jacksonville

 

Top / Bottom 5 Passing Defenses -- low # is good

92.2 -- Kansas City

80.5 -- NY Jets

90.1 -- Chicago

90.5 -- Houston

91.9 -- Seattle

........

 

103.9 -- NY Giants

111.8 -- New England

117.3 -- San Diego

119.3 -- Tampa Bay

121.2 -- Washington

 

Top / Bottom 5 Rushing Defenses -- low # is good

91.0 -- Miami

93.0 -- San Francisco

94.1 -- Minnesota

94.1 -- Seattle

95.4 -- New Orleans

..........

 

118.6 -- Tennessee

121.9 -- Buffalo

122.2 -- New Orleans

122.7 -- Jacksonville

135.4 -- NY Jets

 

Top / Bottom 5 Overall Defenses (which is more than just an average of rushing / passing scores) -- low # is good

84.7 -- San Francisco

85.3 -- Seattle

86.2 -- Chicago

86.8 -- Houston

89.7 -- Minnesota

..............

 

110.3 -- Jacksonville

112.7 -- Washington

115.4 -- Tennessee

115.5 -- New Orleans

121.2 -- Buffalo

 

Top / Bottom 5 Overall Kicking Units (kick offs, place kicking, punting)

108.8 -- Philadelphia

106.2 -- Houston

106.2 -- New Orleans

105.8 -- Jacksonville

105.2 -- Cincinnati

..........

 

95.5 -- Oakland

95.3 -- New England

95.2 -- Denver

93.9 -- Miami

89.8 -- Washington

 

Top / Bottom 5 Special Teams, Penalties, Turnovers, etc.

141.7 -- Washington

135.4 -- Chicago

131.1 -- Baltimore

122.7 -- New England

118.6 -- Green Bay

.............

 

78.8 -- Buffalo

76.8 -- Philadelphia

63.3 -- Dallas

56.4 -- Detroit

52.3 -- Kansas City

 

********************************

 

OVERALL RANKINGS:

112.7 -- San Francisco

111.9 -- Houston

111.3 -- Chicago

107.3 -- Baltimore

107.0 -- New England

..................

 

91.2 -- Kansas City

91.0 -- Oakland

90.5 -- Buffalo

90.3 -- Jacksonville

87.7 -- Tennessee

Link to comment
Share on other sites

buf @ ari ... 42.5 ... ari -12.0

oak @ atl ... 46.8 ... atl -9.3

cin @ cle ... 46.8 ... cin -1.0

dal @ bal ... 46.2 ... bal -7.0

den @ sd ... 50.6 ... den -1.2

det @ phi ... 44.2 ... phi -4.3

gb @ hou ... 46.2 ... hou -6.7

ind @ nyj ... 43.6 ... nyj -2.4

kc @ tb ... 50.8 ... tb -4.9

stl @ mia ... 45.3 ... mia -0.9

min @ was ... 47.9 ... min -0.4

ne @ sea ... 45.3 ... sea -1.3

nyg @ sf ... 45.8 ... sf -3.5

pit @ ten ... 45.2 ... pit -1.5

Edited by muck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

AFC Playoff teams

HOU, BAL, NE, DEN, SD, MIA

 

NFC Playoff teams

SF, CHI, ATL, ARI, MIN, STL

 

***********

 

Note --- Denver has had the 2nd hardest schedule so far, and from here on out, they have the easiest. Look for them to make the biggest move in the real-life standings over the rest of the season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Top 5 Teams:

 

128.7 -- San Francisco

128.4 -- Houston

125.2 -- Chicago

124.6 -- Atlanta

117.9 -- Arizona

 

Bottom 5 Teams:

80.3 -- Buffalo

79.4 -- New Orleans

77.0 -- Tennessee

76.4 -- Cleveland

75.0 -- Oakland

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...heading into MNF ...

 

buf @ ari ... 42.5 ... ari -12.0 ... BUF won 19-16

oak @ atl ... 46.8 ... atl -9.3 ... ATL won 23-20

cin @ cle ... 46.8 ... cin -1.0 ... CLE won 34-24

dal @ bal ... 46.2 ... bal -7.0 ... BAL won 31-29

den @ sd ... 50.6 ... den -1.2

det @ phi ... 44.2 ... phi -4.3 ... DET won 26-23

gb @ hou ... 46.2 ... hou -6.7 ... GB won 42-24

ind @ nyj ... 43.6 ... nyj -2.4 ... NYJ won 35-9

kc @ tb ... 50.8 ... tb -4.9 ... TB won 38-10

stl @ mia ... 45.3 ... mia -0.9 ... MIA won 17-14

min @ was ... 47.9 ... min -0.4 ... WAS won 38-26

ne @ sea ... 45.3 ... sea -1.3 ... SEA won 24-23

nyg @ sf ... 45.8 ... sf -3.5 ... NYG won 26-3

pit @ ten ... 45.2 ... pit -1.5 ... TEN won 26-23

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I reading this correctly...do your power rankings show that you were right only 3 times this past weekend (in regards to covering your predicted point spread) - the NY Jets game, the Tampa Bay game and the Miami game?

 

Or maybe I am missing the point of your rankings?

 

KO'd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I reading this correctly...do your power rankings show that you were right only 3 times this past weekend (in regards to covering your predicted point spread) - the NY Jets game, the Tampa Bay game and the Miami game?

 

Or maybe I am missing the point of your rankings?

 

KO'd

 

You are reading it right but in Muck's defense, he doesn't put much stock into his model until after week 6. I'm curious what the model says for week 7.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I Put the spread and total I used beside each game. The spread is always based on the home team (so if the home team is favoured its -points, if they are an under dog its just points). The spread and totals always change through out the week so based on where you bet or when you bet they could be different. I just picked a day (pretty sure it was wednesday last week) and used the spread/totals on that day.

 

Based on that the results are below:

 

PIcks 7-7

Against the spread 8-5-1 (The spread was +1 for cle, and you had the same thing, +1 cle)

Totals 10-4

 

Quite an impressive record this week for the totals!

 

 

buf @ ari ... 42.5 ... ari -12.0 ... BUF won 19-16 Spread -4.5 (L) Total 43 (W)

oak @ atl ... 46.8 ... atl -9.3 ... ATL won 23-20 Spread -9 (L) total 48 (W)

cin @ cle ... 46.8 ... cin -1.0 ... CLE won 34-24 Spread 1 (T) Total 44 (W)

dal @ bal ... 46.2 ... bal -7.0 ... BAL won 31-29 Spread -3.5 (L) Total 44 (W)

den @ sd ... 50.6 ... den -1.2 … DEN won 35-24 Spread -2 (W) Total 49.5 (W)

det @ phi ... 44.2 ... phi -4.3 ... DET won 26-23 Spread -4.5 (W) Total 47.5 (L)

gb @ hou ... 46.2 ... hou -6.7 ... GB won 42-24 Spread -3.5 (L) Total 48 (L)

ind @ nyj ... 43.6 ... nyj -2.4 ... NYJ won 35-9 Spread -3 (L) Total 42.5 (W)

kc @ tb ... 50.8 ... tb -4.9 ... TB won 38-10 Spread -3.5 (W) Total 40 (W)

stl @ mia ... 45.3 ... mia -0.9 ... MIA won 17-14 Spread -3.5 (W) Total 37.5 (L)

min @ was ... 47.9 ... min -0.4 ... WAS won 38-26 Spread 1 (W) Total 44 (W)

ne @ sea ... 45.3 ... sea -1.3 ... SEA won 24-23 Spread 3.5 (W) Total 45 (W)

nyg @ sf ... 45.8 ... sf -3.5 ... NYG won 26-3 Spread -5 (W) Total 44.5 (L)

pit @ ten ... 45.2 ... pit -1.5 ... TEN won 26-23 Spread 5.5 (W) Total 42.5 (W)

Edited by kevinkris
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I reading this correctly...do your power rankings show that you were right only 3 times this past weekend (in regards to covering your predicted point spread) - the NY Jets game, the Tampa Bay game and the Miami game?

 

Or maybe I am missing the point of your rankings?

 

KO'd

 

You are reading it right but in Muck's defense, he doesn't put much stock into his model until after week 6. I'm curious what the model says for week 7.

 

 

Actually, he wasn't reading it right at all.

 

Kevinkris has it correct --- he is keeping track of whether or not my model is helpful for a bettor in deciding to take the under or over, and whether or not to take the underdog.

 

For example, take the DEN/SD game ... Vegas was saying SD was favored by 2pts and the O/U was 49.5pts ... my model said DEN was favored by 1.2pts and the O/U was 50.6pts ... so, in using my model, you should have taken the underdog and the over ... both of which were winning bets.

 

So, on the week, if I'm reading Kevinkris's results correctly, I was 8-5-1 vs. the spread and 9-5 on the O/U.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, he wasn't reading it right at all.

 

Kevinkris has it correct --- he is keeping track of whether or not my model is helpful for a bettor in deciding to take the under or over, and whether or not to take the underdog.

 

For example, take the DEN/SD game ... Vegas was saying SD was favored by 2pts and the O/U was 49.5pts ... my model said DEN was favored by 1.2pts and the O/U was 50.6pts ... so, in using my model, you should have taken the underdog and the over ... both of which were winning bets.

 

So, on the week, if I'm reading Kevinkris's results correctly, I was 8-5-1 vs. the spread and 9-5 on the O/U.

 

 

thats right except you were 10-4 for the O/U. I put a L for the Pit/Ten game when it was really a W. Fixed it now!

Edited by kevinkris
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, he wasn't reading it right at all.

 

Kevinkris has it correct --- he is keeping track of whether or not my model is helpful for a bettor in deciding to take the under or over, and whether or not to take the underdog.

 

For example, take the DEN/SD game ... Vegas was saying SD was favored by 2pts and the O/U was 49.5pts ... my model said DEN was favored by 1.2pts and the O/U was 50.6pts ... so, in using my model, you should have taken the underdog and the over ... both of which were winning bets.

 

So, on the week, if I'm reading Kevinkris's results correctly, I was 8-5-1 vs. the spread and 9-5 on the O/U.

 

Um... sure, OK.

 

O/U aside, I don't see how you came out 8-5-1 against the spread. You got 3 right against the spread. I'm having trouble following kevin's logic.

 

Here's one line from his analysis as an example:

det @ phi ... 44.2 ... phi -4.3 ... DET won 26-23 Spread -4.5 (W) Total 47.5 (L)

 

He has you as a W for the spread but PHI was favored to win and they lost outright. That is NOT a win. IF I'm missing something, please explain.

 

Here's another:

nyg @ sf ... 45.8 ... sf -3.5 ... NYG won 26-3 Spread -5 (W) Total 44.5 (L)

Again, you AND Vegas had SF favored, yet NYG won. Again, that is not a win.

 

What am I missing :shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RE: NYG at SF ...

 

Vegas predicted SF would win by 5pts

I predicted SF would win by 3.5pts

 

I was less confident than Vegas, and therefore, you would have taken the underdog and the points ... and come out victorious.

 

Vegas predicted the O/U at 44.5pts

I predicted the O/U at 45.8pts

 

I was more confident than Vegas in the points scored, and therefore, you would have taken the over ... and you would have lost.

 

So, on the NYG@SF game, I was 1-1; for the week, I was 18-9 (with a push on the winner of the CIN/CLE game).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RE: NYG at SF ...

 

Vegas predicted SF would win by 5pts

I predicted SF would win by 3.5pts

 

I was less confident than Vegas, and therefore, you would have taken the underdog and the points ... and come out victorious.

 

Vegas predicted the O/U at 44.5pts

I predicted the O/U at 45.8pts

 

I was more confident than Vegas in the points scored, and therefore, you would have taken the over ... and you would have lost.

 

So, on the NYG@SF game, I was 1-1; for the week, I was 18-9 (with a push on the winner of the CIN/CLE game).

 

Yeah, but the Vegas spreads change constantly up until game time. Not only that, but Vegas isn't trying to predict the actual spread, they are trying to predict what spread will attract an even number of bettors on each side - at least that's what I think they're doing with the spread. Since Vegas gets juice, they just need even money on each side of the spread. Any lopsided betting, adds risk for the odds makers.

 

I see how kevin is using your model, but it's sloppy at best if only because the Vegas spreads change too frequently to compare against. On Thursday your model may be less confident in Team A and vice versa come Sunday. The line adjusts based on bettors leaning heavily in one direction. Now that I think of it, your model, used as kevin suggests, is a model that bets opposite the masses since they ultimately determine the spread. However, unless the user is constantly changing their bets based on the spread between your model and Vegas, there's no true measurement against. His analysis was taken from a snapshot in time. Had he taken spreads from another moment in time, your record could be dramatically different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right ... which means that you could (theoretically) use the model to place multiple offsetting bets during the course of a week as the lines change (because, barring a typo, my model isn't changing during the week).

 

PS -- I'd love to read about your specific ideas on each game each week in a way that would allow the user of the information to possibly profit.

Edited by muck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I Put the spread and total I used beside each game. The spread is always based on the home team (so if the home team is favoured its -points, if they are an under dog its just points). The spread and totals always change through out the week so based on where you bet or when you bet they could be different. I just picked a day (pretty sure it was wednesday last week) and used the spread/totals on that day.

 

Based on that the results are below:

 

PIcks 7-7

Against the spread 8-5-1 (The spread was +1 for cle, and you had the same thing, +1 cle)

Totals 10-4

 

Quite an impressive record this week for the totals!

 

 

buf @ ari ... 42.5 ... ari -12.0 ... BUF won 19-16 Spread -4.5 (L) Total 43 (W)

oak @ atl ... 46.8 ... atl -9.3 ... ATL won 23-20 Spread -9 (L) total 48 (W)

cin @ cle ... 46.8 ... cin -1.0 ... CLE won 34-24 Spread 1 (T) Total 44 (W)

dal @ bal ... 46.2 ... bal -7.0 ... BAL won 31-29 Spread -3.5 (L) Total 44 (W)

den @ sd ... 50.6 ... den -1.2 … DEN won 35-24 Spread -2 (W) Total 49.5 (W)

det @ phi ... 44.2 ... phi -4.3 ... DET won 26-23 Spread -4.5 (W) Total 47.5 (L)

gb @ hou ... 46.2 ... hou -6.7 ... GB won 42-24 Spread -3.5 (L) Total 48 (L)

ind @ nyj ... 43.6 ... nyj -2.4 ... NYJ won 35-9 Spread -3 (L) Total 42.5 (W)

kc @ tb ... 50.8 ... tb -4.9 ... TB won 38-10 Spread -3.5 (W) Total 40 (W)

stl @ mia ... 45.3 ... mia -0.9 ... MIA won 17-14 Spread -3.5 (W) Total 37.5 (L)

min @ was ... 47.9 ... min -0.4 ... WAS won 38-26 Spread 1 (W) Total 44 (W)

ne @ sea ... 45.3 ... sea -1.3 ... SEA won 24-23 Spread 3.5 (W) Total 45 (W)

nyg @ sf ... 45.8 ... sf -3.5 ... NYG won 26-3 Spread -5 (W) Total 44.5 (L)

pit @ ten ... 45.2 ... pit -1.5 ... TEN won 26-23 Spread 5.5 (W) Total 42.5 (W)

 

 

For Week 6, the 'tweaked model' I reference in the "Week 7" thread would have been:

 

4-10 vs. the spread

6-8 vs. the O/U

 

...fyi...

 

...and, also remember that this 'tweaked model' (and the main model) are for amusement purposes only... :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, but the Vegas spreads change constantly up until game time. Not only that, but Vegas isn't trying to predict the actual spread, they are trying to predict what spread will attract an even number of bettors on each side - at least that's what I think they're doing with the spread. Since Vegas gets juice, they just need even money on each side of the spread. Any lopsided betting, adds risk for the odds makers.

 

I see how kevin is using your model, but it's sloppy at best if only because the Vegas spreads change too frequently to compare against. On Thursday your model may be less confident in Team A and vice versa come Sunday. The line adjusts based on bettors leaning heavily in one direction. Now that I think of it, your model, used as kevin suggests, is a model that bets opposite the masses since they ultimately determine the spread. However, unless the user is constantly changing their bets based on the spread between your model and Vegas, there's no true measurement against. His analysis was taken from a snapshot in time. Had he taken spreads from another moment in time, your record could be dramatically different.

 

 

I completely agree, I even said it in my post that I picked a time and used that spread and O/U, and that it could easily be different based on the time or place you bet. Muck asked if someone could use his model to see how his analysis would do betting agaisnt Vegas and I agreed to help. Many of his spreads are very close to the actual spreads put out by Vegas so of course it could change is record depending on when you bet/where you bet, but if you have any suggestions on how else we could do it, let me know!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information