Seahawks 7 pt favorites vs Cards

[NJSeahawk]

I think Arizona is exactly as bad as Vegas think it is. They've done a great job winning the close games and overcoming injuries, but Stanton isn't some unknown rookie QB with huge potential. He's a 30 year old career backup who has only started 8 games since 2008, with a career 10 TD-11 INT ratio. His completion percentage this year is just above 50% and I have no idea why people are just assuming he is going to play well at CLink.

This.

Epic thissery.

Plus Zona was the first team to give Wilson his first loss at Seattle.

I say Wilson makes them pay. He makes them pay dearly.

[youtube]QOyXHF3zPwY[/youtube]

 

[Largent80]

If I were betting football games, I would take the Hawks and points knowing Fitz is out.

Easy money.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

It's because the Hawks are a hell of a lot better at home, and the Cards are incredibly over-rated.

 

[sutz]

Guys, guys, guys.....and gals. Remember, it's a betting line, not a prediction. It's not that Vegas thinks we'll win by ten, it's that they think nobody will bet the Cards unless they parlay a ton of points. The fact that the line hasn't moved much indicates that the American sports betting public agrees that the Cards don't have much of a chance.

Of course, this isn't an election or even a popularity poll (well, it actually kind of is that), it's a football game. Now, I think it's time for the team to step up, and historically, they have done so when needed. It's hard to beat the Seahawks record in Nov/Dec the past few years, so I like our chances in this game and moving forward.

The home crowd is poised to give our D that extra half step that traditionally helps us do much better in pass rush and overall defense.

Go Hawks!!!

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

Seems to be -6.5 in most places. While I'm predicting that we win by double digits, I probably wouldn't have the confidence to give away 6.5, let alone 7, if I had to put money on it. But I wouldn't take the Cards' side of it either.

Yeah I was just in Reno for 3 days and the Silver Legacy book had Seahawks -6.5.
I'll take the Cards and the points, especially with that D. I heard or read somewhere (probably ringless here) that at this point in the season, they're giving up one point per game more than our D did last season. Impressive. To me that makes a 6.5 point spread simply too big, even though I think our team finds a way to wing Sunday. Just not by that much.

 

[AgentDib]

Guys, guys, guys.....and gals. Remember, it's a betting line, not a prediction. It's not that Vegas thinks we'll win by ten, it's that they think nobody will bet the Cards unless they parlay a ton of points. The fact that the line hasn't moved much indicates that the American sports betting public agrees that the Cards don't have much of a chance.

You are completely right, but the initial line is still a very strong input for prediction models for perhaps non-intuitive reasons.

i) Assume that Vegas isn't trying to predict anything but is instead trying to split the money. Specifically, they are trying to split the total quantity of money rather than the total quantity of bets. Vegas is perfectly happy if 70% of bettors pick one team and 30% pick the other, so long as the money involved is 50%/50%.

ii) Assume that the amount bet by each person is highly correlated with their level of information - few can afford to bet very much if they bet poorly. Furthermore, the more confidence that people have in their side (the further the line is from their opinion), the more they will bet.

1) Ergo, If Vegas's line is "wrong", say to accommodate a lot of grandmas betting on the Cowboys, then they are at risk of having the large/smart money end up on the same side and dramatically tilting the overall balance of money. They only get a safe guaranteed profit if the money matches and if there was a long-term trend exposed in their lines (overrating/underrating team X) then it would be picked up on and Vegas might lose money.

2) Ergo, Vegas pays a lot of money to the "best" odds makers to predict the match-up close enough that they do not risk losing money. If the money starts coming in on one side too much anyway, or if things change, then they promptly move it to balance things and correct any oversights made by the initial odds-maker.

For example, the Dallas Cowboys covered the spread 49.9% of the time between 1978 and 2010. The status of being America's team with a bunch of casual bettors favoring them every week made no impact on their average spread, which instead nearly perfectly fit their actual capabilities.

 

[NJSeahawk]

 

[3Girls'HawkDad]

Cards defense will cover our pedestrians man to man and blitz Russell up the middle.

We will not have any hot routes or checkdowns, or audibles as usual.

Wilson will scramble to make a play only to have the ball dropped or he will overthrow a guy when he is wide open.

We continue to have open backfields on third and anything. Receivers catch a three yard pass on 3rd and 5.

John Ryan shanks a few punts.

Defense will be good for a half and bad for a half.

Cards 146
Hawks 13

 

[Sparkchaser737]

Cards defense will cover our pedestrians man to man and blitz Russell up the middle.

We will not have any hot routes or checkdowns, or audibles as usual.

Wilson will scramble to make a play only to have the ball dropped or he will overthrow a guy when he is wide open.

We continue to have open backfields on third and anything. Receivers catch a three yard pass on 3rd and 5.

John Ryan shanks a few punts.

Defense will be good for a half and bad for a half.

Cards 146
Hawks 13

LOL...So you are saying there is a chance they might cover the line. I better go back and change my pick.

 

[Popeyejones]

If I were betting football games, I would take the Hawks and points knowing Fitz is out.

Fitz is 80% name and volume stats at this point. I don't think his absence will have that big of a bearing on the game. He's a big body with hands. That's useful on third downs, but that's about it.

 

[NJSeahawk]

If I were betting football games, I would take the Hawks and points knowing Fitz is out.

Fitz is 80% name and volume stats at this point. I don't think his absence will have that big of a bearing on the game. He's a big body with hands. That's useful on third downs, but that's about it.

Over the hill players always seem to have epic games against us. I hope he sits out.

 

[Popeyejones]

If I were betting football games, I would take the Hawks and points knowing Fitz is out.

Fitz is 80% name and volume stats at this point. I don't think his absence will have that big of a bearing on the game. He's a big body with hands. That's useful on third downs, but that's about it.

Over the hill players always seem to have epic games against us. I hope he sits out.

IMO mostly because the Hawks run a lot of zone and those older guys maintain their relevance by mastering the ability to find holes and seams in zone coverage (e.g. take out the YAC from being built like a TE and Boldin is basically just a wildly successful zone buster at this point in his career).

I dunno, though. If forced to guess, if Fitz plays I'd project him for 3-4 receptions for 35-45 yards or so. Maybe throw in a .15 chance for a goal line fade or slant TD for the fantasy fans, but in my mind the biggest question is how many of those 3-4 catches come on 3rd & 5+ yards for first down. If it's all of them he'll have an impact on the game. If not, he's mostly a non-factor, IMO.

It's really too bad, as at some point while people were (rightly) blaming the QBs Fitz went from a top WR in the game to above average to pretty average, IMO. I still love him as a player for what he was in his prime, but he's way past it.*

*He seems to also get points in the scoring system of public opinion for staying on a long-suffering team, but I'm a little bit more hesitant on that one, as he was paid MASSIVELY to do so.

 

[MidwestHawker]

Guys, guys, guys.....and gals. Remember, it's a betting line, not a prediction. It's not that Vegas thinks we'll win by ten, it's that they think nobody will bet the Cards unless they parlay a ton of points. The fact that the line hasn't moved much indicates that the American sports betting public agrees that the Cards don't have much of a chance.

You are completely right, but the initial line is still a very strong input for prediction models for perhaps non-intuitive reasons.

i) Assume that Vegas isn't trying to predict anything but is instead trying to split the money. Specifically, they are trying to split the total quantity of money rather than the total quantity of bets. Vegas is perfectly happy if 70% of bettors pick one team and 30% pick the other, so long as the money involved is 50%/50%.

ii) Assume that the amount bet by each person is highly correlated with their level of information - few can afford to bet very much if they bet poorly. Furthermore, the more confidence that people have in their side (the further the line is from their opinion), the more they will bet.

1) Ergo, If Vegas's line is "wrong", say to accommodate a lot of grandmas betting on the Cowboys, then they are at risk of having the large/smart money end up on the same side and dramatically tilting the overall balance of money. They only get a safe guaranteed profit if the money matches and if there was a long-term trend exposed in their lines (overrating/underrating team X) then it would be picked up on and Vegas might lose money.

2) Ergo, Vegas pays a lot of money to the "best" odds makers to predict the match-up close enough that they do not risk losing money. If the money starts coming in on one side too much anyway, or if things change, then they promptly move it to balance things and correct any oversights made by the initial odds-maker.

For example, the Dallas Cowboys covered the spread 49.9% of the time between 1978 and 2010. The status of being America's team with a bunch of casual bettors favoring them every week made no impact on their average spread, which instead nearly perfectly fit their actual capabilities.

Well put. The betting market is the most objective measure and predictor of two teams as there is. The percentages bear this out, as long-term historical data has shown that higher spreads are correlated with a higher winning percentage in the game. The betting line is a far better probabilistic predictor than a media member or a fan with a gut feeling.

 

[Largent80]

Converting 1st downs is what football is all about. It tires defenses out, we saw it in SD and then vs. Dallas.

Having Fitz out is a big deal. He is just one player, but one that is very hard to replace.

 

[Popeyejones]

Guys, guys, guys.....and gals. Remember, it's a betting line, not a prediction. It's not that Vegas thinks we'll win by ten, it's that they think nobody will bet the Cards unless they parlay a ton of points. The fact that the line hasn't moved much indicates that the American sports betting public agrees that the Cards don't have much of a chance.

You are completely right, but the initial line is still a very strong input for prediction models for perhaps non-intuitive reasons.

i) Assume that Vegas isn't trying to predict anything but is instead trying to split the money. Specifically, they are trying to split the total quantity of money rather than the total quantity of bets. Vegas is perfectly happy if 70% of bettors pick one team and 30% pick the other, so long as the money involved is 50%/50%.

ii) Assume that the amount bet by each person is highly correlated with their level of information - few can afford to bet very much if they bet poorly. Furthermore, the more confidence that people have in their side (the further the line is from their opinion), the more they will bet.

1) Ergo, If Vegas's line is "wrong", say to accommodate a lot of grandmas betting on the Cowboys, then they are at risk of having the large/smart money end up on the same side and dramatically tilting the overall balance of money. They only get a safe guaranteed profit if the money matches and if there was a long-term trend exposed in their lines (overrating/underrating team X) then it would be picked up on and Vegas might lose money.

2) Ergo, Vegas pays a lot of money to the "best" odds makers to predict the match-up close enough that they do not risk losing money. If the money starts coming in on one side too much anyway, or if things change, then they promptly move it to balance things and correct any oversights made by the initial odds-maker.

For example, the Dallas Cowboys covered the spread 49.9% of the time between 1978 and 2010. The status of being America's team with a bunch of casual bettors favoring them every week made no impact on their average spread, which instead nearly perfectly fit their actual capabilities.

Well put. The betting market is the most objective measure and predictor of two teams as there is. The percentages bear this out, as long-term historical data has shown that higher spreads are correlated with a higher winning percentage in the game. The betting line is a far better probabilistic predictor than a media member or a fan with a gut feeling.

Absolutely agreed. At some point it became folk wisdom to just point out that betting lines aren't predictions, despite the fact that betting lines are one of the better proxies we have at predicting outcomes.

Kinda similar to how the truism "correlation doesn't equal causation" is too often used as just a fancy way to say "I disagree" regardless of instances in which it applies or not.

 

[Popeyejones]

Converting 1st downs is what football is all about. It tires defenses out, we saw it in SD and then vs. Dallas.

Oh yeah, I'm not minimizing that at all. To be fair though, with Sherman's size if the Hawks would just have him shadow Fitz on 3rd downs even THAT could be completely neutralized.

Go back to when they played together and I don't think anyone would have predicted that at 34 Boldin would be the superior player to Fitz at 31, but I think that argument can at least be reasonably made at this point, which is pretty crazy.

 

[HawkFan72]

As I mentioned before in another thread, the Cards will test us deep multiple times. This is a huge game for our corners, particularly Maxwell. Remember the play that Manning gouged us with earlier this year where the slot and outside receiver run deep routes that pick each other off? I can totally see John Brown taking it outside from the slot position deep and getting several huge plays on us. Communication between the safety (or possibly even the outside LB) and the corner will be critical to keeping tabs on their receivers. We've got to play tight coverage without causing PI's. If the corners get beat, at least hold them and get a 5 yard penalty instead of a PI or a TD.

Our pass rush at the same time MUST put more pressure on Stanton to not give him time to step up and throw the long bomb. Arians loves to take risks down the field, and he will no doubt do it against our shaky secondary and underperforming pass rush.

I agree. The Cards are going to be looking at that Denver film very closely because our D was getting gashed in that 2nd half, and the plays didn't even require a QB with a good arm.

 

[NJSeahawk]

Converting 1st downs is what football is all about. It tires defenses out, we saw it in SD and then vs. Dallas.

Having Fitz out is a big deal. He is just one player, but one that is very hard to replace.

Game time decision...

http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/1661/larry-fitzgerald

Larry Fitzgerald (MCL) is expected to be a game-time decision for Sunday's game against the Seahawks.
Fitz "remains optimistic" despite missing Wednesday and Thursday's practices. We suppose that's good news, but there seems to be much more for the Cardinals to lose than gain by forcing Fitz out there on a bum knee against the league's best secondary. We'd ultimately expect him to sit.

 

[Anonymous]

Converting 1st downs is what football is all about. It tires defenses out, we saw it in SD and then vs. Dallas.

Having Fitz out is a big deal. He is just one player, but one that is very hard to replace.

Game time decision...

http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/1661/larry-fitzgerald

Larry Fitzgerald (MCL) is expected to be a game-time decision for Sunday's game against the Seahawks.
Fitz "remains optimistic" despite missing Wednesday and Thursday's practices. We suppose that's good news, but there seems to be much more for the Cardinals to lose than gain by forcing Fitz out there on a bum knee against the league's best secondary. We'd ultimately expect him to sit.

I'm almost inclined to see him dress.

Fitz being on the game-day roster means they'll be one fully-healthy body short when Larry aggravates that MCL sometime during the game.

:stirthepot:

 

[edogg23]

It feels like to me this is the game where the Seahawks either bring it and win, or show they just don't have what it takes to win it this year.