Vegas betting Saints have a disappointing season

ScottF · 05-02-2017, 09:47 AM

Originally Posted by AsylumGuido

Just because we didn't draft one player you wanted doesn't mean that all of the other notable improvements are nullified. I am VERY optimistic. Do you realize that the Saints had the 4th highest number of QB hits in the NFL last season? They are not as far off from being very good as you think.

And, the Saints DID address the DE position. Just because they didn't do it when you wanted doesn't mean that it hasn't been addressed. Kikaha, Hendrickson, Okafor and Mohammad are all players that were not here last season vying for that job. And I contend that there could very well be a greater degree of improvement on our overall team strength with the addition of Ramczyk rather than any defensive end that was available at the same spot in the draft.

You are so blinded by your disappointment that a certain position wasn't addressed right when YOU wanted it addressed that you are missing the big picture.

As far as Cooks' "top 10 number" being replaced, Brees and the Payton designed offence will easily replace those numbers. Cooks leaving does not create any sort of vacuum. I doubt the offense will miss a beat moving into next season. In fact, I expect it to be improved. Cooks was a great player for us, but Brees makes top 10 players, not the other way around.

Just curious-
have you ever had a conversation, here or in real life in which you didn't attack the the other person for his/her opinions?

AsylumGuido · 05-02-2017, 09:56 AM

Originally Posted by ScottF

Just curious-
have you ever had a conversation, here or in real life in which you didn't attack the the other person for his/her opinions?

Absolutely. All the time. I simply look at the positives. If that rubs negative thinking people the wrong way that is their problem, not mine. I use facts, not emotion. There are probably more people on this site that see things the same way. They use logic. If you see being shown facts and logic as being attacked then, once again, that is your problem.

ScottF · 05-02-2017, 10:10 AM

Originally Posted by AsylumGuido

Absolutely. All the time. I simply look at the positives. If that rubs negative thinking people the wrong way that is their problem, not mine. I use facts, not emotion. There are probably more people on this site that see things the same way. They use logic. If you see being shown facts and logic as being attacked then, once again, that is your problem.

So, in other words, No.

as for your "facts", why pull an arbitrary stat like QB hits out of nowhere? Did the QB hits lead to interceptions? a lower passer rating? fewer points scored? qb starters getting knocked out? That would be "No's" across the board. The fact is we were 27th in ints and sacks, 31st in points, and last in passing yards.

Seer1 · 05-02-2017, 10:40 AM

Originally Posted by foreverfan

Well consider the other sides view...
Other NFC South teams are getting better.

Drew Brees is getting older.

We lost one of the best WRs in the league.

We have a team and draft that has been injury prone.

Tickets and Beers ain't getting cheaper.

We have a very tough schedule.

If you believe this is a great team you should...

Drink the Kool-Aid and...
put your money where your mouth is.

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

Grape please, flavored with a little vodka. And I am putting my money where my mouth is. That's called groceries...
.

AsylumGuido · 05-02-2017, 11:39 AM

Originally Posted by ScottF

So, in other words, No.

as for your "facts", why pull an arbitrary stat like QB hits out of nowhere? Did the QB hits lead to interceptions? a lower passer rating? fewer points scored? qb starters getting knocked out? That would be "No's" across the board. The fact is we were 27th in ints and sacks, 31st in points, and last in passing yards.

And one player that may, or may not, be marginally better than someone we already have on the roster or can pick up in a later round in the draft have that much of an impact? I doubt it. In fact, I am expecting Ramczyk to play a bigger role in the success of the Saints currently and for several years to come.

By the way, did you ever take the time to read the article in the other thread that addresses your very concern?

In addition, do you not understand the concept of dependent duties concerning a defense? The defensive line and the the secondary are co-dependent. Their success, or lack there of, directly correlates to the success or failure of the other. The defensive backfield was totally decimated last season. The fact that the line was still right at the top of the league in QB hits is huge. If they were given any extra time at all by the weakened secondary they would have had far more of the shiny stats you have point out.

SaintFanInATLHELL · 05-02-2017, 12:18 PM

I guess it's time for my bi-annual reminder about Vegas lines:

The lines have nothing to do with reality. They are set only to balance the betting money on both sides of the bet. So if the win line for the Saints is 8.5, that only means that half the betting public believes the Saints will win more while the other half believes they will win less.

As I said, it's all about perception, and nothing to do with reality.

SFIAH

WillSaints81 · 05-02-2017, 12:29 PM

Originally Posted by ScottF

You cannot discount the fact that Cooks had top 10 numbers last year that we have not replaced. Thomas is an absolute star, but will he get as many open looks with Snead on the other side instead of Cooks? Of course not.

As for the RB's, in your own words there are only so many balls to go around. I can see making one of those moves, but why both when we had and still have defensive needs?

Ramczyk might be a probowler this year, but if so that means we have a very good tackle (Strief) making $5,100,000 on the bench. I'd rather have that money on the field, specifically the defensive side.

We have great potential for improvement defensively, but most of our upgrades other than Lattimore fall under the IF category: If our DB's stay healthy, If the two backups we signed to start pan out, If the new coaches get max results from the younger players.
I would just feel a hell of a lot more optimistic if we had drafted someone to start opposite Jordan and not an OT, safety, or RB

1.I have made that exact same point about Thomas and nobody wanted to listen. I think the FO drank the Ginn kool-aid thinking his breakout year was because of his potential when he was drafted and being "utilized" finally when I don't think that's the case at all. Some receivers will not play well regardless of QB. Hopkins is doing fine with the crappy QBs throwing to him so it's not always the QB. A qb can make receivers look good but if they demand volume it will be very hard.

2.We did need a satellite back. Ingram has been the weak link in our running game because of his lack of consistency. When we drafted him in 2011, he cost us a chance at OT against the packers, we were using him too often and squeezing out ugly wins and losing two games, one of which was his fault(bucs). In any game Brees struggles in, Ingram has not proven to carry the team on his back. The concern I have is thinking AP is going to churn 40 yard runs out of 10 carries a game. Good luck with that. It's not always about just talent.

3.Streiff is not going to the bench. I don't see it. he always plays better in preseason anyway. But Ram will be taking someone's place at some point in the season. Hopefully, Peat does not get hurt and Ram ends up being a poor fit there.

4. It's been pointed out we were top five in QB hits. The corners have to be able to get physical with these receivers, to give receivers less time to be open. But the defense needs rest and not have to be thrown back on the field while the offense puts up two field goals before the last quarter.

Rugby Saint II · 05-02-2017, 12:45 PM

Originally Posted by SaintFanInATLHELL

I guess it's time for my bi-annual reminder about Vegas lines:

The lines have nothing to do with reality. They are set only to balance the betting money on both sides of the bet. So if the win line for the Saints is 8.5, that only means that half the betting public believes the Saints will win more while the other half believes they will win less.

As I said, it's all about perception, and nothing to do with reality.

SFIAH

Exactly. Why would people who don't follow our team as closely as we do think we will be any better than another 7-9 season without signing marquee players? The nation in general doesn't have a clue how improved we are.

I hesitate to predict any win/loss ratio until after training camp but I feel like we will come out of nowhere like we did during our Super bowl run.

ScottF · 05-02-2017, 02:41 PM

Originally Posted by SaintFanInATLHELL

I guess it's time for my bi-annual reminder about Vegas lines:

The lines have nothing to do with reality. They are set only to balance the betting money on both sides of the bet. So if the win line for the Saints is 8.5, that only means that half the betting public believes the Saints will win more while the other half believes they will win less.

As I said, it's all about perception, and nothing to do with reality.

SFIAH

You are correct as always, Professor, but...
wouldn't you feel better if the O/U was 10.5 and not 8.5?
there is some science with the algorithm that popped out the number 8.5

CheramieIII · 05-02-2017, 03:13 PM

Here's is an example of the accuracy of Vegas when it comes to the NFL:

These are the last 5 weeks of 2016 Statistics Beats the NFL Point Spread

Right 11 and Wrong 15

Not good at all.

05-02-2017, 09:47 AM	#21
ScottF 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Atlanta Posts: 6,324	Re: Vegas betting Saints have a disappointing season Originally Posted by AsylumGuido Just because we didn't draft one player you wanted doesn't mean that all of the other notable improvements are nullified. I am VERY optimistic. Do you realize that the Saints had the 4th highest number of QB hits in the NFL last season? They are not as far off from being very good as you think. And, the Saints DID address the DE position. Just because they didn't do it when you wanted doesn't mean that it hasn't been addressed. Kikaha, Hendrickson, Okafor and Mohammad are all players that were not here last season vying for that job. And I contend that there could very well be a greater degree of improvement on our overall team strength with the addition of Ramczyk rather than any defensive end that was available at the same spot in the draft. You are so blinded by your disappointment that a certain position wasn't addressed right when YOU wanted it addressed that you are missing the big picture. As far as Cooks' "top 10 number" being replaced, Brees and the Payton designed offence will easily replace those numbers. Cooks leaving does not create any sort of vacuum. I doubt the offense will miss a beat moving into next season. In fact, I expect it to be improved. Cooks was a great player for us, but Brees makes top 10 players, not the other way around. Just curious- have you ever had a conversation, here or in real life in which you didn't attack the the other person for his/her opinions?

05-02-2017, 09:56 AM	#22
AsylumGuido 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Bossier City, LA Posts: 24,395	Re: Vegas betting Saints have a disappointing season Originally Posted by ScottF Just curious- have you ever had a conversation, here or in real life in which you didn't attack the the other person for his/her opinions? Absolutely. All the time. I simply look at the positives. If that rubs negative thinking people the wrong way that is their problem, not mine. I use facts, not emotion. There are probably more people on this site that see things the same way. They use logic. If you see being shown facts and logic as being attacked then, once again, that is your problem. saintsfan1976 likes this.

05-02-2017, 10:10 AM	#23
ScottF 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Atlanta Posts: 6,324	Re: Vegas betting Saints have a disappointing season Originally Posted by AsylumGuido Absolutely. All the time. I simply look at the positives. If that rubs negative thinking people the wrong way that is their problem, not mine. I use facts, not emotion. There are probably more people on this site that see things the same way. They use logic. If you see being shown facts and logic as being attacked then, once again, that is your problem. So, in other words, No. as for your "facts", why pull an arbitrary stat like QB hits out of nowhere? Did the QB hits lead to interceptions? a lower passer rating? fewer points scored? qb starters getting knocked out? That would be "No's" across the board. The fact is we were 27th in ints and sacks, 31st in points, and last in passing yards.

05-02-2017, 10:40 AM	#24
Seer1 Site Donor Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Bayou Bayfield CO Posts: 4,722	Re: Vegas betting Saints have a disappointing season Originally Posted by foreverfan Well consider the other sides view... Other NFC South teams are getting better. Drew Brees is getting older. We lost one of the best WRs in the league. We have a team and draft that has been injury prone. Tickets and Beers ain't getting cheaper. We have a very tough schedule. If you believe this is a great team you should... Drink the Kool-Aid and... put your money where your mouth is. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Grape please, flavored with a little vodka. And I am putting my money where my mouth is. That's called groceries... . jnormand likes this.

05-02-2017, 11:39 AM	#25
AsylumGuido 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Bossier City, LA Posts: 24,395	Re: Vegas betting Saints have a disappointing season Originally Posted by ScottF So, in other words, No. as for your "facts", why pull an arbitrary stat like QB hits out of nowhere? Did the QB hits lead to interceptions? a lower passer rating? fewer points scored? qb starters getting knocked out? That would be "No's" across the board. The fact is we were 27th in ints and sacks, 31st in points, and last in passing yards. And one player that may, or may not, be marginally better than someone we already have on the roster or can pick up in a later round in the draft have that much of an impact? I doubt it. In fact, I am expecting Ramczyk to play a bigger role in the success of the Saints currently and for several years to come. By the way, did you ever take the time to read the article in the other thread that addresses your very concern? In addition, do you not understand the concept of dependent duties concerning a defense? The defensive line and the the secondary are co-dependent. Their success, or lack there of, directly correlates to the success or failure of the other. The defensive backfield was totally decimated last season. The fact that the line was still right at the top of the league in QB hits is huge. If they were given any extra time at all by the weakened secondary they would have had far more of the shiny stats you have point out.
	“The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.” — Winston Churchill

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

05-02-2017, 12:18 PM	#26
SaintFanInATLHELL The Professor Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Lithonia, GA Posts: 2,647	Re: Vegas betting Saints have a disappointing season I guess it's time for my bi-annual reminder about Vegas lines: The lines have nothing to do with reality. They are set only to balance the betting money on both sides of the bet. So if the win line for the Saints is 8.5, that only means that half the betting public believes the Saints will win more while the other half believes they will win less. As I said, it's all about perception, and nothing to do with reality. SFIAH jnormand, hagan714, AsylumGuido and 1 others like this.

05-02-2017, 12:29 PM	#27
WillSaints81 1000 Posts + Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 4,267	Re: Vegas betting Saints have a disappointing season Originally Posted by ScottF You cannot discount the fact that Cooks had top 10 numbers last year that we have not replaced. Thomas is an absolute star, but will he get as many open looks with Snead on the other side instead of Cooks? Of course not. As for the RB's, in your own words there are only so many balls to go around. I can see making one of those moves, but why both when we had and still have defensive needs? Ramczyk might be a probowler this year, but if so that means we have a very good tackle (Strief) making $5,100,000 on the bench. I'd rather have that money on the field, specifically the defensive side. We have great potential for improvement defensively, but most of our upgrades other than Lattimore fall under the IF category: If our DB's stay healthy, If the two backups we signed to start pan out, If the new coaches get max results from the younger players. I would just feel a hell of a lot more optimistic if we had drafted someone to start opposite Jordan and not an OT, safety, or RB 1.I have made that exact same point about Thomas and nobody wanted to listen. I think the FO drank the Ginn kool-aid thinking his breakout year was because of his potential when he was drafted and being "utilized" finally when I don't think that's the case at all. Some receivers will not play well regardless of QB. Hopkins is doing fine with the crappy QBs throwing to him so it's not always the QB. A qb can make receivers look good but if they demand volume it will be very hard. 2.We did need a satellite back. Ingram has been the weak link in our running game because of his lack of consistency. When we drafted him in 2011, he cost us a chance at OT against the packers, we were using him too often and squeezing out ugly wins and losing two games, one of which was his fault(bucs). In any game Brees struggles in, Ingram has not proven to carry the team on his back. The concern I have is thinking AP is going to churn 40 yard runs out of 10 carries a game. Good luck with that. It's not always about just talent. 3.Streiff is not going to the bench. I don't see it. he always plays better in preseason anyway. But Ram will be taking someone's place at some point in the season. Hopefully, Peat does not get hurt and Ram ends up being a poor fit there. 4. It's been pointed out we were top five in QB hits. The corners have to be able to get physical with these receivers, to give receivers less time to be open. But the defense needs rest and not have to be thrown back on the field while the offense puts up two field goals before the last quarter.

05-02-2017, 12:45 PM	#28
Rugby Saint II Bounty Money $$$ Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: 5800 Airline Dr. Metairie, LA. Posts: 23,762	Re: Vegas betting Saints have a disappointing season Originally Posted by SaintFanInATLHELL I guess it's time for my bi-annual reminder about Vegas lines: The lines have nothing to do with reality. They are set only to balance the betting money on both sides of the bet. So if the win line for the Saints is 8.5, that only means that half the betting public believes the Saints will win more while the other half believes they will win less. As I said, it's all about perception, and nothing to do with reality. SFIAH Exactly. Why would people who don't follow our team as closely as we do think we will be any better than another 7-9 season without signing marquee players? The nation in general doesn't have a clue how improved we are. I hesitate to predict any win/loss ratio until after training camp but I feel like we will come out of nowhere like we did during our Super bowl run.

05-02-2017, 02:41 PM	#29
ScottF 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Atlanta Posts: 6,324	Re: Vegas betting Saints have a disappointing season Originally Posted by SaintFanInATLHELL I guess it's time for my bi-annual reminder about Vegas lines: The lines have nothing to do with reality. They are set only to balance the betting money on both sides of the bet. So if the win line for the Saints is 8.5, that only means that half the betting public believes the Saints will win more while the other half believes they will win less. As I said, it's all about perception, and nothing to do with reality. SFIAH You are correct as always, Professor, but... wouldn't you feel better if the O/U was 10.5 and not 8.5? there is some science with the algorithm that popped out the number 8.5

05-02-2017, 03:13 PM	#30
CheramieIII Fan Since 1967 Join Date: May 2004 Location: Nomad Posts: 7,470 Blog Entries: 3	Re: Vegas betting Saints have a disappointing season Here's is an example of the accuracy of Vegas when it comes to the NFL: These are the last 5 weeks of 2016 Statistics Beats the NFL Point Spread Right 11 and Wrong 15 Not good at all. hagan714 likes this.

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: https://blackandgold.com/saints/82623-vegas-betting-saints-have-disappointing-season.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date	Hits
Vegas betting Saints have a disappointing season	This thread	Refback	05-01-2017 09:33 PM	4
The Latest New Orleans Saints News \| SportSpyder	This thread	Refback	05-01-2017 09:13 PM	21