In hindsight, was doing Hard Knocks perhaps a mistake?

[Spider-Dan]

The closing point spread is generated by what's expected from the two teams on the basis of their past performance, along with what's expected in their game against each other.

The opening point spread is a closer fit to that description.
The closing point spread is moved almost entirely by incoming bet volume, as the house tries to balance action on both sides (with the exception of something like a late announcement of a player being ruled out for the game).

Your continued insistence that casinos have special insight into team quality remains unsubstantiated.  The fact that you are citing how badly the casinos have missed on the outcome of Dolphins' games against teams with winning records is actually evidence against their accuracy.

[Dolfanalyst]

I've heard this mentioned on gambling shows more than once. Sportsbooks like to have as close to an even amount of action on each side of a bet. This means that regardless of who wins, they will make a profit on the commission they charge, which is the cut the sportsbook takes of every bet before it is paid out. It really doesn't have much to do with past performances as much as public opinion of expectations. This is why professional gamblers win and the average person doesn't. Professional gamblers are paying attention to injuries, weather, and other variables while most people are betting their feelings based on how well they did last week.

The opening lines are based on past performance and they don't move much in response to the public's betting.  They certainly don't move anywhere near 13.6 points -- the Dolphins' average margin of defeat against winning teams, over and above the closing line.

Make no mistake -- the Dolphins' average margin of defeat over and above the line against winning teams is highly noteworthy.  They were essentially blown away by winning teams, in comparison to what was expected.

[Dolfanalyst]

It's almost like they go into a play not to lose, or just keep it close mentality; but when they needed to turn it on there was nothing there.  If I went back and looked at my Shame of the Game picks I'd bet I chose McDaniel or Tua for the losses.  Poor play calling and poor execution.  I wouldn't say it's a "culture" problem per se, they just need an OC to step in and call the plays.

You don't figure the bolded portion above constitutes a culture problem?  What is a culture if it isn't a way a team experiences itself that results in a repeated pattern of performance?

[Dolfanalyst]

The opening point spread is a closer fit to that description.
The closing point spread is moved almost entirely by incoming bet volume, as the house tries to balance action on both sides (with the exception of something like a late announcement of a player being ruled out for the game).

Your continued insistence that casinos have special insight into team quality remains unsubstantiated.  The fact that you are citing how badly the casinos have missed on the outcome of Dolphins' games against teams with winning records is actually evidence against their accuracy.

And that (the bolded portion) is determined by what's expected by the public between the two teams in their game against each other.  So the closing line is a combination of 1) the opening line, which is based largely on past performance, and 2) the public's appreciation for variables specific to the game at hand between the two teams, including injuries, etc.

At any rate, anybody arguing the Dolphins' 13.6-point margin of defeat on average against winning teams, over and above the spread, isn't noteworthy is climbing steeply uphill.  Mentioning minutiae here and there certainly doesn't undercut it.  That number could be ~7 and it would still be noteworthy.

[Spider-Dan]

2) the public's appreciation for variables specific to the game at hand between the two teams, including injuries, etc.

Another way to format this phrase is "what everyone thinks."
The idea that the closing line reflects what the public already believes about team quality is not exactly a convincing argument as to its accuracy.

At any rate, anybody arguing the Dolphins' 13.6-point margin of defeat on average against winning teams, over and above the spread, isn't noteworthy is climbing steeply uphill.

I'd say that anyone arguing for the prescience of Vegas in accurately assessing team quality (WRT the outcome of games) has an even steeper climb if the lines are that far removed from the outcomes.

[Dolfanalyst]

Another way to format this phrase is "what everyone thinks."
The idea that the closing line reflects what the public already believes about team quality is not exactly a convincing argument as to its accuracy.
I'd say that anyone arguing for the prescience of Vegas in accurately assessing team quality (WRT the outcome of games) has an even steeper climb if the lines are that far removed from the outcomes.

Do you figure the lines are typically that different from the actual outcomes, or do you figure the Dolphins were unusual in that regard?

[Spider-Dan]

If you're asking my personal opinion: I don't attribute any particular insight to the casinos, at all.  The lines end up where the betting money pushes them.

But from your standpoint, your question is self-defeating: if the casinos were particularly inaccurate in their ability to assess the Miami Dolphins - the team we are discussing - then we shouldn't care about what the casinos thought.  The philosophy of judging team quality by point spreads is proven worthless if it's that far off of the actual outcome, and in the specific case of the Miami Dolphins, you are arguing that it was.

[Dolfanalyst]

If you're asking my personal opinion: I don't attribute any particular insight to the casinos, at all.  The lines end up where the betting money pushes them.

But from your standpoint, your question is self-defeating: if the casinos were particularly inaccurate in their ability to assess the Miami Dolphins - the team we are discussing - then we shouldn't care about what the casinos thought.  The philosophy of judging team quality by point spreads is proven worthless if it's that far off of the actual outcome, and in the specific case of the Miami Dolphins, you are arguing that it was.

Vegas lines are generally far more accurate in predicting NFL game outcomes than they were for the Dolphins against winning teams in 2024.  For the Dolphins against winning teams in 2024 they were significantly more inaccurate, and almost always in the same direction -- with the Dolphins' losing to winning teams by a margin far greater on average than predicted.  Based on the Dolphins' previous performance and the appraisals of the betting public -- which essentially amounts to crowdsourcing -- the Dolphins were expected to perform against winning teams far better than they did.

[CF DolFan]

Do you figure the lines are typically that different from the actual outcomes, or do you figure the Dolphins were unusual in that regard?

I just looked and typically only about half the NFL teams cover the spread. This means the line is wrong as much as it is correct. For this past 2023 season Miami was at 55.6% which puts them at 9th in the league for covering the spread. Well about Buffalo's 42.1%. Good thing they weren't on Hard Knocks.

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/trends/ats_trends/?range=yearly_2023

[Dolfanalyst]

I just looked and typically only about half the NFL teams cover the spread. This means the line is wrong as much as it is correct. For this past 2023 season Miami was at 55.6% which puts them at 9th in the league for covering the spread. Well about Buffalo's 42.1%. Good thing they weren't on Hard Knocks.

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/trends/ats_trends/?range=yearly_2023

We're talking about a degree of deviation from the spread here -- 13.6 points on average against winning teams -- not simply a binary "yes/no did they cover."

If you want to compare the Dolphins to Buffalo for example, consider again that the Dolphins' margin of defeat against winning teams, over and above the spread, was 13.6 points.  Buffalo's was 7.1 points in the other direction -- Buffalo did better than expected by 7.1 points on average against winning teams in 2024 (including beating the Dolphins by 28 points when they were favored by a mere 2.5 on October 1).

So, the difference between Buffalo and the Dolphins in terms of how they performed in comparison to what was expected against winning teams was a whopping 20.7 points.

[Spider-Dan]

In other words, between the Bills and the Dolphins, Vegas was off by 20.7 points in their games against winning teams.

This is hardly an endorsement of casino accuracy in team evaluation.

[Dolfanalyst]

In other words, between the Bills and the Dolphins, Vegas was off by 20.7 points in their games against winning teams.

This is hardly an endorsement of casino accuracy in team evaluation.

So your position is that the fact Buffalo overcame Vegas's estimation by 7.1 points in one direction, and the Dolphins undershot Vegas's estimation by 13.6 points in the other direction, was meaningless regarding a difference in how the two teams functioned against winning teams?