Turnovers in NFL Handicapping

[QUOTE=gaslamp;5794]Are you talking about using the one team with the worst T.O. margin in the entire league each week? Or in each game, using the team with the worst margin as between those two opponents? (Understand it's just one factor and not automatic) Also, any data on those rare situations where a team with the worst margin is playing against a team with the best? Seems like that type of 'perfect storm' might show even more dramatic results.[/QUOTE] Scooby-Doo where are you? Where's Superskrub when you need him! He'll spit out the results in a few minutes...

[QUOTE=gaslamp;5794]Are you talking about using the one team with the worst T.O. margin in the entire league each week? Or in each game, using the team with the worst margin as between those two opponents? (Understand it's just one factor and not automatic) Also, any data on those rare situations where a team with the worst margin is playing against a team with the best? Seems like that type of 'perfect storm' might show even more dramatic results.[/QUOTE] No, there are parameters that apply each week to determine how much of a difference you need in TO margin but you are using mutiple teams if the differences are enough. I've broke it down in the past to going against below .200 teams who are positive in TO margin, etc. It all works but not as good as the original parameters. One other thing I look at is to make sure I don't play against top teams, those with win pct. of .800 or better. And, I also want to be playing a worse TO margin team off a loss, so I know they are focused to play better as well. I have never looked at the worse against the best, there wouldn't be that many samples, but I have looked at the worse team each week off a loss and it doesn't work as well as the basic situation.

[QUOTE=Sixth Sense;5783]Don't have the numbers in front of me but it was profitable last year and I believe has been profitable just about every year going back to 1983. Would have to check as there may have been a year or two where it was a game or two under .500. The situation I use doesn't apply until week five and ends after week 12. What I have found is late in the year, the situation doesn't perform as well. I imagine that is because the bad teams (which are usually poor turnover margin teams) have quit for the season. Keep in mind it is just one piece of handicapping. There can be other situations going against the turnover plays, either letdown, bounce back, fundamental rushing plays, etc. Also, the line needs to be fair as well. So, a lot more goes into this than just blindly playing the situation. If it keeps me off a team, that can be just as good as playing on a team.[/QUOTE] For this week, I show Washington -2 and KC +2. Bet on Washington? Baltimore +2 and Minnesota +8. Bet on Baltimore? St Louis -7 and Jacksonville +2. Bet on St Louis? (I cannot bet on a team only scoring 7ppg). Carolina -9 and TB -2. Bet on Carolina? Plus Carolina was a playoff team LY. Detroit -3 and GB +7. Bet on Detroit? Plus, Detroit has played better teams. Philadelphia +5 and Oakland -4. Bet on Oakland? (again, I cannot bet on a team that looks to have quit). Buffalo -6 and NYJ +0. Bet on Buffalo? Tennessee -5 and NE +3. Bet on Tennessee? Chicago +0 and Atlanta +4. Bet on Chicago? Denver +6 and SD +2. Bet on SD? Plus SD rested, and Denver coming off two huge wins.

Old School... That's the general right idea, but I don't think Sixth Sense is advocating a blind play on whoever has the substantially worse T.O. margin as between two teams. In your list of potential bets, many of them wouldn't catch my eye simply because their T.O. margin is consistent with their point differential for the season. For example, St. Louis would not catch my eye, because, while they are -7 in T.O.'s, they are also -112 in point differential, which is entirely consistent. A game I would be looking at is Caro/TB. I'd be looking to fade TB in this game because their T.O. diff. seems out of whack with their point differential (-2 vs. a huge -72). I'd look to maybe play on Pitt, as they have a solid point diff. of +15 in the face of a T.O. diff of -4. Pitt has managed to outscore their opponents this season despite losing the turnover battle. That's huge in my view. In summary, I only look at T.O. margin WITH point differential and not alone.

Just for fun... I've isolated the games this week in which I feel the season long differentials of turnovers vs. points scored are significant enough to either play or fade a team AND the play or fade is consistent with Old School's lines per his power ratings. There are three such plays: DETROIT +13.5 (g.b.) - This is a fade of the Packers, who are just 2-2 with a +11 point differential (PD), yet have a huge turnover diff. (TD) of +7, second in the league. O.S. line is +11. Pack's season numbers should be better with +7 turnovers. They appear over valued. WASH -6.5 (kc) - Fading the Chiefs, who are 0-5 with a terrible PD of -54 yet have enjoyed a +2 TD for the season. O.S. line is -9. Chiefs are overvalued. PITT -14 (cleve) - Play here is ON the Steelers. They've managed to go 3-2 with a PD of +15 despite a terrible TD of -4 for the season. O.S. makes line -15. Steelers undervalued at this point in the season. In each game, the opponent of the team I've either played or faded shows nothing out of the ordinary in the TD/PD department.

Someone with a good play-by-play database should run a correlation between int's and hurries (or knockdowns, or sacks). And certain RB's fumble more often than others. This is due to 1)a base number of touches per fumble (not lost fumbles-- that is random) and, 2)defensive efficency of forcing fumbles... but that is where it gets tricky. Dr. Bob is a dumbass for saying they are 90% random, but i'm sure people with better anaylsis aren't going to tell it on a mtn. Hell, I wouldn't tell you fucks if I knew ;)

[QUOTE=Jafar;5829]Dr. Bob is a dumbass for saying they are 90% random, but i'm sure people with better anaylsis aren't going to tell it on a mtn. Hell, I wouldn't tell you fucks if I knew ;)[/QUOTE] don't underestimate people's inability to keep their mouths shut. often, ego plays a bigger role than making money. yeah, i know it makes no sense.

We bet Washington at -6, Pittsburg at -14, and will add Detroit at +13 1/2. I am thinking of betting both Detroit and Pittsburg over on the team total.

[QUOTE=gaslamp;5824]I've isolated the games this week in which I feel the season long differentials of turnovers vs. points scored are significant enough to either play or fade a team AND the play or fade is consistent with Old School's lines per his power ratings. There are three such plays: DETROIT +13.5 (g.b.) - This is a fade of the Packers, who are just 2-2 with a +11 point differential (PD), yet have a huge turnover diff. (TD) of +7, second in the league. O.S. line is +11. Pack's season numbers should be better with +7 turnovers. They appear over valued. WASH -6.5 (kc) - Fading the Chiefs, who are 0-5 with a terrible PD of -54 yet have enjoyed a +2 TD for the season. O.S. line is -9. Chiefs are overvalued. PITT -14 (cleve) - Play here is ON the Steelers. They've managed to go 3-2 with a PD of +15 despite a terrible TD of -4 for the season. O.S. makes line -15. Steelers undervalued at this point in the season. In each game, the opponent of the team I've either played or faded shows nothing out of the ordinary in the TD/PD department.[/QUOTE] Will be interesting to see how they do.

I've been tracking the TO stuff since 1997('98?), and I don't think its been really profitable overall since 2002. That is what my db says anyway.