|
|
Van Jefferson Receptions Prop is currently Over/Under 3.5 (+135/-175).
The money has been on the Under as it opened 3.5 @ -116 before it was bet down to 3.5 @ -175.
|
|
|
|
|
|
FACTORS THAT FAVOR THE OVER:
|
|
THE BLITZ projects the Los Angeles Rams as the 5th-most pass-oriented team among all teams this week with a 65.2% pass rate, accounting for their underlying tendencies and matchup dynamics.This game will be played in a dome—meaning no wind, higher pass volume, higher touchdown potential, and increased passing efficiency.THE BLITZ projects Van Jefferson to be much more involved in his team's passing game this week (15.7% projected Target Share) than he has been this year (8.7% in games he has played).The New Orleans Saints cornerbacks grade out as the worst collection of CBs in the NFL this year in covering pass-catchers.The Los Angeles Rams offensive line has allowed their QB 2.59 seconds before getting pressured (2nd-best in football since the start of last season), which has a strong impact on all passing attack statistics across the board.
|
|
|
|
|
|
FACTORS THAT FAVOR THE UNDER:
|
|
THE BLITZ projects the Rams to call the 6th-least offensive plays on the slate this week with 62.9 plays, accounting for their underlying tendencies and game dynamics.Opposing teams have averaged 33.8 pass attempts per game vs. the New Orleans Saints defense this year: 7th-least in the NFL.The Los Angeles Rams offensive line grades out as the 2nd-worst in football this year in protecting the QB, which has a harmful effect on all air attack stats across the board.Van Jefferson has been among the least sure-handed receivers in football, completing a measly 53.4% of passes thrown his way since the start of last season, ranking in the 3rd percentile among wide receiversThe New Orleans Saints have stacked the box vs. opponents on just 13.5% of their plays since the start of last season, 9th-least in the league. Choosing not to keep an extra defender near the line of scrimmage improves pass defense at the expense of run-stopping.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
