What Am I missing about this prop bet (1 Viewer)

[Assani Fisher]

Need some help here. As a rule, I never ever bet on anything to do with the Redskins(lone exception has been as part of Wong Teaser) because I'll be the first to admit that I'm baised. Moreover, another one of my general rules is that you always need to ask yourself why would Vegas offer a bet that you think is +EV, and if your answer is "because I know more than Vegas" then you're 100% wrong. Of course this second rule doesn't apply when you find one book with a line that is way off, but that isn't the case here as MULTIPLE SPORTS BOOKS HAVE THIS LINE and they have it the exact same. However, I just don't see what I'm missing.

Will J Campbell Throw an INT:

Yes(-130)

No(EV)

Pittsburgh has 6 INTs on the year which would put them in a 8 way tie for 16th place in the NFL(note: This does however include yesterday's games, so Pit has played one less game).

Jason Campbell has yet to throw a INT all year long.

The game is predicted to be close and low scoring, so I don't think the Skins will go crazy with passing the ball(especially considering Moss is banged up).

As I said, I never ever bet on the Skins or anything to do with them. But is this line not way off? Insight please.

 

[Urlacher54]

He's due.

And Washington will not be able to run the ball with as much success as they have had all year.

 

[Big Sug]

Hey Assani.

Props are rough, 30 and 40-cent lines suck. But edges can still be found with them, imo.

I think the answer to this question is that INTs are way more random than the average fan thinks and that low (or high) INT numbers regress to the mean in the long term. Remember last year when everyone thought Garrard was miraculously accurate? Well he isn't. Low INT numbers just aren't sustainable for human QBs not named Steve Young. The line is probably just standard issue stuff; the books don't believe Campbell is any sort of exception to the historical average.

I think the Skins will have to throw the ball to win tonight so the idea that Campbell will fewer attempts than normal doesn't have too much credence.

 

[renesauz]

Looks about right to me. He's waaaaaay overdue for a pick, and if you're honest with yourself, you'd realize that he's been very lucky so far and should have had 3 or 4 picked before now. Corners have had a worse then normal case of the dropsies against him.

 

[wharf rat]

I think that he will throw 2 picks tonight.

Not that I would be money on it.

I'm just saying...

 

[Warehouse Nasty]

It would seem to me that interceptions would be one of the toughest events to predict. Prop bets where you have an O/U on yards. completions, catches, etc. can be accurately forecasted I think. An INT though is one pass that could go wrong. One tipped ball, one hail mary pass caught by the defense, etc. I know he hasn't had any INT's this year but this isn't something I'd risk any of my money on...

 

[Nipsey]

0 Ints this far into the season is flukey. -130 seems about right.

 

[PlasmaDogPlasma]

With Samuels either missing the game or playing hurt, I'd say the Steelers are going to get to Campbell enough to make him throw some bad balls. If I were betting I would bet on an INT tonight.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

In the last three seasons, in what percentage of games has the starting quarterback for the home team not thrown an interception?

That's your starting point. You can then make an adjustment for Campbell throwing fewer INTs than average, and for the Steelers picking off fewer than average (or average, or more than average, or whatever they've done).

But if you use just this season's Redskins and this season's Steelers as your starting point, you're extrapolating from too small a sample.

 

[Cookiemonster]

Because, paired w/ the Steelers' tough run defense, is a beat-up secondary. Portis Should play well in PPR and O.K. in non. The 'Skins should be planning on passing the ball, and getting it out quick. There are likely going to be high # of passes for Campbell, and quite a few of them under some sort of duress. I bet - 1 INT.

 

[piratemike]

Not only will he throw an INT, but it will be picked off by Troy Polamalu. Mark it down.

 

[Assani Fisher]

some good points(although I think the "hes due" is incredibly bad logic). However, Campbell has averaged less than 1 INT per game for his entire career, so I don't know if you can just chalk it up to a fluke this year that hes not throwing them a lot. I fully agree that INTs can be fluky from game to game though.

 

[AhrnCityPahnder]

Not only will he throw an INT, but it will be picked off by Troy Polamalu. Mark it down.

From your fingertips to Gods monitor.

 

[Maven]

Thing is, Jason has matured this season and the offense he operates in doesnt require him to force passes. There are so many check down options in the WCO. I don't think he'll throw an int tonight.

 

[rick6668]

some good points(although I think the "hes due" is incredibly bad logic). However, Campbell has averaged less than 1 INT per game for his entire career, so I don't know if you can just chalk it up to a fluke this year that hes not throwing them a lot. I fully agree that INTs can be fluky from game to game though.

Good points. Campbell has averaged less than 1 INT per game BEFORE this season.Looks like he is taking more sacks though to prevent the INT. 16 sacks through 8 games (21 last year) and has already exceeded last years yards lost from sacks.

 

[big0mar]

Washington hasn't played a defense as good as Pittsburgh's

 

[TheWick]

coin flip bet...not liking it Assani

 

[awesomeness]

I'd stay away from this one.

 

[dgreen]

Looks about right to me. He's waaaaaay overdue for a pick, and if you're honest with yourself, you'd realize that he's been very lucky so far and should have had 3 or 4 picked before now. Corners have had a worse then normal case of the dropsies against him.

LOL. I came in here to post the exact opposite. He hasn't thrown many balls that SHOULD have been picked.

 

[T Bell]

Here are the reasons to expect a INT tonight:Samuels may be out, but is certainly hobbling, which hurts his blind side pass protectionPIT is an aggressive, blitzing defense that's very quick off the edge with its OLBsPIT has a good chance of shutting down or limiting Portis, and forcing the passMoss may be out, which greatly limits Campbell's passing optionsThe reasons NOT to expect an INT tonight are:Campbell hasn't thrown one all yearthe PIT secondary is missing a lot of guysthe 'Skins run game has been the best in the league and can take pressure off of Campbell to make playsPIT offense doesn't figure to rack up points, making this a close game again limiting risksIt's a close call, and it's much too reliant upon Samuels and Moss playing for me to like this bet.

Thing is, Jason has matured this season and the offense he operates in doesnt require him to force passes. There are so many check down options in the WCO. I don't think he'll throw an int tonight.

Couldn't you say that about every game?

 

[Dexter Manley]

The only thing I can think of is that it's starting to look like Santana Moss will miss this game. That would put ARE, Thrash, and Devin Thomas as our top 3 wr. None of those guys are close to being a legitmate WR1. All it takes is 1 miscommunication, misread, or wrong route to make an easy interception.

Also, Samuels is dinged. If he doesn't go the whole game, there's going to be some major pressure on JC, especially when you consider how subpar Jansen has been on the other side in pass pro this season.

On the flip side, this is a home game for JC, so their won't be any issues with crowd noise. And Campbell has been making excellent decisions this season.

I think Yes for -130 is a ripoff. No for even is probably slightly +EV, but this line isn't far off.

 

[Dexter Manley]

Looks about right to me. He's waaaaaay overdue for a pick, and if you're honest with yourself, you'd realize that he's been very lucky so far and should have had 3 or 4 picked before now. Corners have had a worse then normal case of the dropsies against him.

LOL. I came in here to post the exact opposite. He hasn't thrown many balls that SHOULD have been picked.

This is Jason Campbell we're talking about, not Eli Manning. Through 8 games, no QB has had better decision making than JC, this season.Also, whoever brought up the fact that Campbell has taken more sacks this season than last, that's been by design for the most part. Zorn would rather JC take a sack than have him force the ball down the field, risking a pick. Zorn actually considers these types of sacks to be "positive plays."

 

[Assani Fisher]

Yea after thinking about it some more, I think its not as great as I once though, but I still think its slightly EV. I think the true odds using a 15 cent line should be

Yes(-110)

No(-120)

So I'll put a small 1/2 unit wager down on it.

Oh and I really hope that this thread doesn't get bumped with "I told you so" after the game no matter what the outcome is...hate silly results oriented thinking.

 

[BR33ZE]

I think that he will throw 2 picks tonight.Not that I would be money on it.I'm just saying...

 

[Chase Stuart]

some good points(although I think the "hes due" is incredibly bad logic). However, Campbell has averaged less than 1 INT per game for his entire career, so I don't know if you can just chalk it up to a fluke this year that hes not throwing them a lot. I fully agree that INTs can be fluky from game to game though.

He would need to average less than 0.5 INT per game.

 

[BR33ZE]

Washington hasn't played a defense as good as Pittsburgh's

Giants??????

 

[T Bell]

Washington hasn't played a defense as good as Pittsburgh's

Giants??????

Eagles? The Eagles were the #1 ranked rushing defense in the NFL until Portis hit them.

 

[T Bell]

some good points(although I think the "hes due" is incredibly bad logic). However, Campbell has averaged less than 1 INT per game for his entire career, so I don't know if you can just chalk it up to a fluke this year that hes not throwing them a lot. I fully agree that INTs can be fluky from game to game though.

He would need to average less than 0.5 INT per game.

Correct, although because of his relative youth we're including in our discussion the earliest starts of his career when he was on the steepest part of his learning curve. I think the "truth" lies between the <1 pick per game of 2006-07, and the 0 INT's per game that he's currently on this year, and I could see that number being lower than .5. You can't dismiss his lack of INT's for lack of risk taking because Campbell has thrown deep, and he's expecially also hit a lot of intermediate range passes, and this has included by sticking the ball into tight coverage when he's needed to, as well as checking down or throwing it away when appropriate. This hasn't been a dink and dunk offense.

 

[BR33ZE]

Washington hasn't played a defense as good as Pittsburgh's

Giants??????

Eagles? The Eagles were the #1 ranked rushing defense in the NFL until Portis hit them.

Yeah, he probably should have said that the Pittsburgh D will be in the top 5 D's Washington has played so far this year.

 

[dgreen]

some good points(although I think the "hes due" is incredibly bad logic). However, Campbell has averaged less than 1 INT per game for his entire career, so I don't know if you can just chalk it up to a fluke this year that hes not throwing them a lot. I fully agree that INTs can be fluky from game to game though.

He would need to average less than 0.5 INT per game.

Correct, although because of his relative youth we're including in our discussion the earliest starts of his career when he was on the steepest part of his learning curve. I think the "truth" lies between the <1 pick per game of 2006-07, and the 0 INT's per game that he's currently on this year, and I could see that number being lower than .5. You can't dismiss his lack of INT's for lack of risk taking because Campbell has thrown deep, and he's expecially also hit a lot of intermediate range passes, and this has included by sticking the ball into tight coverage when he's needed to, as well as checking down or throwing it away when appropriate. This hasn't been a dink and dunk offense.

And, like I mentioned, I can't really think of many (any?) passes that SHOULD have been picked. The closest I can remember was his one bad throw last week where he thought Thomas was going to continue his route but Thomas stopped in an open zone. But, IIRC, it wasn't a super easy pick for the defender. Other than that, my memory fails me and I can't think of one other pass that he clearly got away with.

 

[Cookiemonster]

Just curious. Anyone have a way to figure out Campbell's history vs. zone-blitz schemes?

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

some good points(although I think the "hes due" is incredibly bad logic). However, Campbell has averaged less than 1 INT per game for his entire career, so I don't know if you can just chalk it up to a fluke this year that hes not throwing them a lot. I fully agree that INTs can be fluky from game to game though.

He would need to average less than 0.5 INT per game.

Why?Let's say that a "game" involves rolling a six-sided die three times.An INT occurs whenever I roll a one.If I play this game for a sufficiently long time, I will average exactly 0.5 INTs per game.But I will be substantially less likely than 50% to throw an INT in my next game. (I will be 42% likely to throw an INT.)The reason is that sometimes I will throw more than 1 INT in a game. To balance out the multiple-INT games, I have to have more than half of my games INT-free in order to maintain a 0.5 INT/g average.

 

[JGalligan]

Maybe we should also be asking ourselves:

How many INT's do the Steelers D average per game? (I'm looking now)

 

[Assani Fisher]

some good points(although I think the "hes due" is incredibly bad logic). However, Campbell has averaged less than 1 INT per game for his entire career, so I don't know if you can just chalk it up to a fluke this year that hes not throwing them a lot. I fully agree that INTs can be fluky from game to game though.

He would need to average less than 0.5 INT per game.

I think MT addressed this well.also I guess one could argue that its not linear....in other words, him throwing one INT would make it more likely that he throws another INT on future passes in the game due to confidence and the fact that they're more likely to be trailing and need to take chances

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

some good points(although I think the "hes due" is incredibly bad logic). However, Campbell has averaged less than 1 INT per game for his entire career, so I don't know if you can just chalk it up to a fluke this year that hes not throwing them a lot. I fully agree that INTs can be fluky from game to game though.

He would need to average less than 0.5 INT per game.

Why?Let's say that a "game" involves rolling a six-sided die three times.An INT occurs whenever I roll a one.If I play this game for a sufficiently long time, I will average exactly 0.5 INTs per game.But I will be substantially less likely than 50% to throw an INT in my next game. (I will be 42% likely to throw an INT.)The reason is that sometimes I will throw more than 1 INT in a game. To balance out the multiple-INT games, I have to have more than half of my games INT-free in order to maintain a 0.5 INT/g average.

Oh, I responded to your post before reading Assani's post that you were responding to.Your basic point was right -- 0.5 INT/g is a lot closer than 1 INT/g as the relevant number.

 

[Cookiemonster]

The only thing I can think of is that it's starting to look like Santana Moss will miss this game. That would put ARE, Thrash, and Devin Thomas as our top 3 wr. None of those guys are close to being a legitmate WR1. All it takes is 1 miscommunication, misread, or wrong route to make an easy interception.

Concur. Exactly what I was coming back in to post.

 

[Assani Fisher]

some good points(although I think the "hes due" is incredibly bad logic). However, Campbell has averaged less than 1 INT per game for his entire career, so I don't know if you can just chalk it up to a fluke this year that hes not throwing them a lot. I fully agree that INTs can be fluky from game to game though.

He would need to average less than 0.5 INT per game.

Correct, although because of his relative youth we're including in our discussion the earliest starts of his career when he was on the steepest part of his learning curve. I think the "truth" lies between the <1 pick per game of 2006-07, and the 0 INT's per game that he's currently on this year, and I could see that number being lower than .5. You can't dismiss his lack of INT's for lack of risk taking because Campbell has thrown deep, and he's expecially also hit a lot of intermediate range passes, and this has included by sticking the ball into tight coverage when he's needed to, as well as checking down or throwing it away when appropriate. This hasn't been a dink and dunk offense.

agreed, Campbell's ypa is 7.6

 

[Assani Fisher]

some good points(although I think the "hes due" is incredibly bad logic). However, Campbell has averaged less than 1 INT per game for his entire career, so I don't know if you can just chalk it up to a fluke this year that hes not throwing them a lot. I fully agree that INTs can be fluky from game to game though.

He would need to average less than 0.5 INT per game.

Why?Let's say that a "game" involves rolling a six-sided die three times.An INT occurs whenever I roll a one.If I play this game for a sufficiently long time, I will average exactly 0.5 INTs per game.But I will be substantially less likely than 50% to throw an INT in my next game. (I will be 42% likely to throw an INT.)The reason is that sometimes I will throw more than 1 INT in a game. To balance out the multiple-INT games, I have to have more than half of my games INT-free in order to maintain a 0.5 INT/g average.

Oh, I responded to your post before reading Assani's post that you were responding to.Your basic point was right -- 0.5 INT/g is a lot closer than 1 INT/g as the relevant number.

yes, I was wrong there for sure

 

[piratemike]

some good points(although I think the "hes due" is incredibly bad logic). However, Campbell has averaged less than 1 INT per game for his entire career, so I don't know if you can just chalk it up to a fluke this year that hes not throwing them a lot. I fully agree that INTs can be fluky from game to game though.

He would need to average less than 0.5 INT per game.

Why?Let's say that a "game" involves rolling a six-sided die three times.An INT occurs whenever I roll a one.If I play this game for a sufficiently long time, I will average exactly 0.5 INTs per game.But I will be substantially less likely than 50% to throw an INT in my next game. (I will be 42% likely to throw an INT.)The reason is that sometimes I will throw more than 1 INT in a game. To balance out the multiple-INT games, I have to have more than half of my games INT-free in order to maintain a 0.5 INT/g average.

Duh.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

And, like I mentioned, I can't really think of many (any?) passes that SHOULD have been picked.

This is a good observation, because it's a reminder that this isn't just a math question using box score stats. You have to use not only stats, but information that doesn't make it into the stat line, like how many INTs have been dropped.From a mathematical approach, here's how I would figure Campbell's odds of throwing an INT against an average NFL team.

I'd use everything I knew about Campbell heading into the season (his college experience, his draft position, his NFL experience, his NFL stats so far, my subjective impression of his abilities, the offensive scheme he's in, and so on) to estimate his "true" (i.e., expected long-term) INT/attempt ratio for the 2008 season. This would be based mostly on previous results from other QBs who IMO were similarly talented and in similar situations, etc.

In fact, to make the next step work, I'd have to estimate the probability that he falls into each of several ranges -- i.e., there's a 10% chance he'd fall into the 0.038-0.040 INT/attempt range, an 8% chance he'd fall into the 0.035-0.037 INT/attempt range, and so on. Again, we can do this using previous results from other QBs we believe to be similar.

From that point, I could use pure stats and math (without watching any games) to update my estimate of his 2008 INT/game ratio after each game using Bayesian inference analysis.

To jump ahead to one implication, I know that each time I update my estimate, it will be in between (a) my previous estimate, and (b) his results from after I made my previous estimate.

So if my original estimate was that he'd throw 0.036 INT/attempt, and then he goes out on his next 30 attempts and throws 0.033 INT/attempt, I know that my updated estimate after his most recent performance will be lower than 0.036 INT/attempt and higher than 0.033 INT/attempt. This is an implication of the math involved, and is what is often referred to as "regression to the mean."

So here are two points I think are worth noting.

1. Since Campbell has generally thrown fewer INTs than expected this season, our estimate of his "true" INT/attempt should be higher than his actual past INT/attempt on the season so far.

2. Number one is only mathematically provable if our only information comes from the stat box. If we've actually watched the games and can update our estimate using information not included in the box score, it's theoretically possible that our best current estimate is that his "true" INT/attempt is actually lower than his actual current INT/attempt, notwithstanding the fact that he's outperformed our original expectations.

All of the subjective judgments involved (pertaining to both our estimate of Campbell's abilities before the season, and our evaluation of his play that's not reflected in the box score) make this a hard question.

And so far, that's not even taking into account about his specific matchup versus Pittsburgh.

Trying to come up with an appropriate line (to compare against the one offered by the book) is really too much work to do if you're not devoting full-time to it like it's a real job.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

some good points(although I think the "hes due" is incredibly bad logic). However, Campbell has averaged less than 1 INT per game for his entire career, so I don't know if you can just chalk it up to a fluke this year that hes not throwing them a lot. I fully agree that INTs can be fluky from game to game though.

I agree with you....I think using the "he's due" logic is pretty weak. He was due last week to throw a pick and he didn't. The Patriots were due all regular season long to lose a game, and they didn't. There has to be more meat and potatoes behind your reasoning behind it than "he's due."Now, Pittsburgh is the No. 1 defense in the league. They may not be No. 1 in INTs, but they're no. 1 and with that comes pressure to the QB. If Washington can't run the ball well, Campbell will have to throw on downs and distance that he's not used to doing, into a defense that is better than others.I don't know, it's a tough bet. If I had to bet it, I'd say he does't throw a pick but it's about 50/50 in my mind considering the odds.

 

[Thorpe]

That's a great prop. I don't think he throws the pick. Skins will run the ball a lot, plus a lot of short passing.

 

[T Bell]

That's a great prop. I don't think he throws the pick. Skins will run the ball a lot, plus a lot of short passing.

Short passing against a 3-4 zone blitzing scheme with very athletic and active LB's isn't necessarily a cure-all for INT's. That's the type of defense that lures you into thinking you've got a safe checkdown to Cooley in the middle of the field, only to watch a DE or OLB drop off into a shallow zone and pick it. Again, Campbell's made great decisions with the football and accurate throws, and the 0 INT's, while certainly involving some luck, is not an illusion. I just don't think that this is the game in which I'd make that bet.

 

[Cookiemonster]

That's a great prop. I don't think he throws the pick. Skins will run the ball a lot, plus a lot of short passing.

Short passing against a 3-4 zone blitzing scheme with very athletic and active LB's isn't necessarily a cure-all for INT's. That's the type of defense that lures you into thinking you've got a safe checkdown to Cooley in the middle of the field, only to watch a DE or OLB drop off into a shallow zone and pick it. Again, Campbell's made great decisions with the football and accurate throws, and the 0 INT's, while certainly involving some luck, is not an illusion. I just don't think that this is the game in which I'd make that bet.

The WCO was originaly designed to defeat the zone-blitz. Everything has evloved a lot since then, just sayin'...

 

[Raider Nation]

 

[meeka]

 

[Cowboys#1]

boom goes the dynamite

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

 

[Nipsey]

Thanks for the heads up.

 

[[scooter]]

Due.