I won't make a guess yet, but I will tell you this. You absolutely cannot pick a highly regarded favorite to ride, or the most miserable of the bottom feeders to fade, every single game.
The public might bet that way but the very best teams will be consistently overvalued and the worst will be consistently undervalued, that is how it works.
If you get any advice on riding or fading a team all season make a note of it, track it all year, and report the results.
BOL
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
I won't make a guess yet, but I will tell you this. You absolutely cannot pick a highly regarded favorite to ride, or the most miserable of the bottom feeders to fade, every single game.
The public might bet that way but the very best teams will be consistently overvalued and the worst will be consistently undervalued, that is how it works.
If you get any advice on riding or fading a team all season make a note of it, track it all year, and report the results.
As much as I hate to say it... Red Sox... They have the pitching and despite the loss of Ortiz they are still going to put alot of runs accross the plate. But as Key stated I don't think it makes sense to ride a team all year long, baseball is a long season and even the best teams fall into slumps. Best to try and find the overvalued team and jump on them when they start to slump or vice versa... Just my 2 cents...
As much as I hate to say it... Red Sox... They have the pitching and despite the loss of Ortiz they are still going to put alot of runs accross the plate. But as Key stated I don't think it makes sense to ride a team all year long, baseball is a long season and even the best teams fall into slumps. Best to try and find the overvalued team and jump on them when they start to slump or vice versa... Just my 2 cents...
Last year there were 3 teams that had a 50% win percentage or higher as underdogs(aka + money) when you are talking ML.
1. Texas 53.9% (89 games)
2. Houston 53.1% (49 games)
3. Boston 50% (38 games)
But, even the teams that won around 45 to 49.9% at +odds were surely netting a profit. How large/small those odds were for any given game is beyond me. I've listened to few podcasts with Bill Simmons where one of his guests periodically shared the top and bottom profiting teams on the ML. He called it the "bizzaro world" of flat betting $100 on each team blindly. Then shared the results.
Here's 4 through 10
4. Miami 49.4% (81 games)
5. Pitt 48.6% (70 games)
6. Seattle 48.5% (66 games)
7. St. Louis 48% (50 games)
8. Cleveland 45.6% (46 games)
9. Baltimore 44.9% (78 games)
10. Giants 44.8% (58 games)
So to the OP's question, and to support what Keyelement is getting at, you would be better off trying to find the bad teams of last year who made significant improvements(or under the radar improved) who will be undervalued on the ML. Especially right out of the gate where oddsmakers themselves don't have a good pulse on some teams.
I got my eye on the Phillies this year. I like that young pitching staff who got a lot of quality work on the bump last year. None of them(except Velasquez who is injury prone) have showed me any downside. I think there is potential there.
Most importantly, playing the Mets and Nats and whatever opponents who are "perceived" as much better, I think we could see some juicy lines.
Last year there were 3 teams that had a 50% win percentage or higher as underdogs(aka + money) when you are talking ML.
1. Texas 53.9% (89 games)
2. Houston 53.1% (49 games)
3. Boston 50% (38 games)
But, even the teams that won around 45 to 49.9% at +odds were surely netting a profit. How large/small those odds were for any given game is beyond me. I've listened to few podcasts with Bill Simmons where one of his guests periodically shared the top and bottom profiting teams on the ML. He called it the "bizzaro world" of flat betting $100 on each team blindly. Then shared the results.
Here's 4 through 10
4. Miami 49.4% (81 games)
5. Pitt 48.6% (70 games)
6. Seattle 48.5% (66 games)
7. St. Louis 48% (50 games)
8. Cleveland 45.6% (46 games)
9. Baltimore 44.9% (78 games)
10. Giants 44.8% (58 games)
So to the OP's question, and to support what Keyelement is getting at, you would be better off trying to find the bad teams of last year who made significant improvements(or under the radar improved) who will be undervalued on the ML. Especially right out of the gate where oddsmakers themselves don't have a good pulse on some teams.
I got my eye on the Phillies this year. I like that young pitching staff who got a lot of quality work on the bump last year. None of them(except Velasquez who is injury prone) have showed me any downside. I think there is potential there.
Most importantly, playing the Mets and Nats and whatever opponents who are "perceived" as much better, I think we could see some juicy lines.
Good points undermysac. It is too early to call a shot but I have my eye on the Athletics at this point. More later if I think they are truly promising in April.
Some of you may also remember CrashDavis saying he thought he would fade the Braves after the AS break. I challenged that and we made a gentleman's bet of $100 to either's favorite charity. It didn't even go down to the last week. The Braves were a big winner on the money line from that point on and he, like a true gentleman, donated $100 to St. Francis DePaul Society to feed the hungry.
Popular teams winning a lot of games simply become too high on the money line for any real prospect of profitability.
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
Good points undermysac. It is too early to call a shot but I have my eye on the Athletics at this point. More later if I think they are truly promising in April.
Some of you may also remember CrashDavis saying he thought he would fade the Braves after the AS break. I challenged that and we made a gentleman's bet of $100 to either's favorite charity. It didn't even go down to the last week. The Braves were a big winner on the money line from that point on and he, like a true gentleman, donated $100 to St. Francis DePaul Society to feed the hungry.
Popular teams winning a lot of games simply become too high on the money line for any real prospect of profitability.
I will take the Colorado Rockies. Playing in Coors Field means games can go either way in a hurry and the Rockies have decent hitting and pitching. Look for them to be close to a .500 team so you ought to be able to get some decent lines.
I will take the Colorado Rockies. Playing in Coors Field means games can go either way in a hurry and the Rockies have decent hitting and pitching. Look for them to be close to a .500 team so you ought to be able to get some decent lines.
I will take the Colorado Rockies. Playing in Coors Field means games can go either way in a hurry and the Rockies have decent hitting and pitching. Look for them to be close to a .500 team so you ought to be able to get some decent lines.
GL this season and GO TRIBE
Not sure I can buy into the Rockies yet but I am working on this stuff daily now and will get back to you on that.
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
I will take the Colorado Rockies. Playing in Coors Field means games can go either way in a hurry and the Rockies have decent hitting and pitching. Look for them to be close to a .500 team so you ought to be able to get some decent lines.
GL this season and GO TRIBE
Not sure I can buy into the Rockies yet but I am working on this stuff daily now and will get back to you on that.
I got my eyes on the Phillies this year like sac said. They had some decent young kids pitching last year. Also, I really like the Rangers to do very well, not sure if the oddsmakers adjust their lines compared to last year.
I got my eyes on the Phillies this year like sac said. They had some decent young kids pitching last year. Also, I really like the Rangers to do very well, not sure if the oddsmakers adjust their lines compared to last year.
I think a team to possibly play against is the Yanks.
The Yankees traded Miller and Chapman at the end of July. At that time Betances had an ERA of 2.50. While his ERA dropped in August, he finished the year at 3.08. The previous 2 seasons Betances pitched to an ERA of 1.4 and 1.5. Perhaps being "the man" doesn't suit him well. Additionally, Betances is upset with the front office right now, and it is playing out in the local papers.
Then you have the Ruthian efforts last year from Gary Sanchez, who burst onto the scene in 2016, hitting 20 HR's in only 53 games.
Compare that to the prior 2 seasons in the minor leagues ...
2015; 18 HR's in 93 games
2014; 13 HR's in 110 games.
Yankee fans will expect Sanchez to hit a HR every at bat this season. Those expectations could creep into the head of the kid and cause him to try to jack everything, which only results in bad hitting mechanics.
My expectations are that Sanchez struggles early and often.
Then you have the Yankees starting pitching, which consists of a bonafide #1 in Tanaka, and then a bunch of question marks.
Considering the above, plus the Yankee line being typically inflated anyway, I believe you have a decent fade on a regular basis.
I think a team to possibly play against is the Yanks.
The Yankees traded Miller and Chapman at the end of July. At that time Betances had an ERA of 2.50. While his ERA dropped in August, he finished the year at 3.08. The previous 2 seasons Betances pitched to an ERA of 1.4 and 1.5. Perhaps being "the man" doesn't suit him well. Additionally, Betances is upset with the front office right now, and it is playing out in the local papers.
Then you have the Ruthian efforts last year from Gary Sanchez, who burst onto the scene in 2016, hitting 20 HR's in only 53 games.
Compare that to the prior 2 seasons in the minor leagues ...
2015; 18 HR's in 93 games
2014; 13 HR's in 110 games.
Yankee fans will expect Sanchez to hit a HR every at bat this season. Those expectations could creep into the head of the kid and cause him to try to jack everything, which only results in bad hitting mechanics.
My expectations are that Sanchez struggles early and often.
Then you have the Yankees starting pitching, which consists of a bonafide #1 in Tanaka, and then a bunch of question marks.
Considering the above, plus the Yankee line being typically inflated anyway, I believe you have a decent fade on a regular basis.
Ask KeyElement why yankees lines are inflated...they always are after "someone" always nails em. This "someone" might remain in the X files till the end of time.
As for their bullpen, they got Chapman back. The 8th and 9th innings will be tough for opponents to win if tied or losing.
Was Betances pitching the 8th and 9th after Chapman was traded? Maybe he will be more comfortable in a set-up role again.
Ask KeyElement why yankees lines are inflated...they always are after "someone" always nails em. This "someone" might remain in the X files till the end of time.
As for their bullpen, they got Chapman back. The 8th and 9th innings will be tough for opponents to win if tied or losing.
Was Betances pitching the 8th and 9th after Chapman was traded? Maybe he will be more comfortable in a set-up role again.
Ask KeyElement why yankees lines are inflated...they always are after "someone" always nails em. This "someone" might remain in the X files till the end of time.
As for their bullpen, they got Chapman back. The 8th and 9th innings will be tough for opponents to win if tied or losing.
Was Betances pitching the 8th and 9th after Chapman was traded? Maybe he will be more comfortable in a set-up role again.
The Yankees farm will be fat in the next 2 years
Confucius say: Fat farm not related to major league odds.
Now and then even a BLIND squirrel can find an acorn
Ask KeyElement why yankees lines are inflated...they always are after "someone" always nails em. This "someone" might remain in the X files till the end of time.
As for their bullpen, they got Chapman back. The 8th and 9th innings will be tough for opponents to win if tied or losing.
Was Betances pitching the 8th and 9th after Chapman was traded? Maybe he will be more comfortable in a set-up role again.
The Yankees farm will be fat in the next 2 years
Confucius say: Fat farm not related to major league odds.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so. It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly. Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality. Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it. As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.