Vegas has probably gotten smarter
by JI on Mar 2, 2009 9:22 PM PST
Email
PrintBets maybe worth taking;
Atlanta- 84.5 (under)
Boston- 94.5 (slight under)
Chicago C- 94.5 (under)
Cleveland- 83 (big over)
LA Angels- 87.5 (under)
LA Dodgers- 84.5 (under)
Milwaukee- 85.5 (under)
Minnesota- 79.5 (over)
NY Yankees- 96 (under)
Pittsburgh- 66.5 (over)
San Diego- 67.5 (over)
Seattle- 72.5 (over)
Tampa Bay- 89.5 (slight over)
Texas- 81.5 (under)
Toronto- 81.5 (over)
Washington- 68.5 (over)
Sadly, there are only a couple lines that are nutty.
71 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Yeah, I don't see any gimmes.
Last year, taking the under on the M’s and the over on the Rays was free money.
I think taking the over on the Nats is a pretty easy bet this season.
I’m not saying they’ll match PECOTA’s projection (which was a stunningly optimistic 80-82), but they’re better than 68/69 wins this seasons. They were terribly unlucky to lose as many as they did last year, frankly.
Patriotism, Pepper, Professionalism
Cubs (u), Indians (o), Padres (o), Ms (o), Rangers(u), Nats(o)
would be my wagers, but I don’t think that group (if the lines stand) are good enough to put down -115 on.
Just updated the post.
With the legit lines. Almost all of them moved in the direction that you (and I) would have bet.
Yep. There goes all my bets.
If pressed, I would say under on the Yanks and Angels and over on the Dodgers and Ms, but…
man, those are really good lines.
The Rangers
Take the over.
I have fulfilled all my prophecies; all my predictions are up to date.
My train is right on schedule.
by oc on Mar 3, 2009 12:44 AM PST up reply actions
Oakland (o) 81.5 is my favorite.
I really hate the Angels this year, I think Oakland picks up the slack in the west.
I don't like Toronto on the over.
Burnett is gone while McGowan and Marcum are going to be out most of the season.
And with Boston, New York, Tampa Bay, and Baltimore all improving, I just don’t see them going .500.
I think Atlanta is the most obvious bet. I don’t see them improving at all. I take the under all day there.
They added Vazquez and Lowe
And they were a horribly unlucky team last year. They seem .500, maybe better with a few breaks.
by JI on Mar 2, 2009 10:48 PM PST up reply actions
Forgive me, I'm not a gambler,
but does over mean you’re betting they will win more games than the bookies predict and under means less?
Yankees at 97.5 screams under to me
But then, I would enjoy watching them lose even without financial incentive.
Whoa, these lines are way better than last year
My bets would be Seattle/San Diego/Cleveland (o). I feel pretty solid about the first two, reasonably solid about the last one. But there’s no ‘Tampa Bay – 69’ or whatever we had last year.
I don't, but I do see them as a ~86 win team,
which divisional scheduling would probably push to 87/88.
Seems like of all the teams in the West, they have the most collapse potential while the M's look like they have decent upside, along with the A's
I don’t know what to make of Texas at this point
They're going to give up like 30 runs this season
by seattlebruin on Mar 3, 2009 10:08 AM PST up reply actions
No way he stays in the rotation if he's that bad again, is there?
"Fights begin, finger prints are took, days is lost, bail is made, court dates are ignored, cycle is repeated."
his contract would seem to suggest otherwise
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.
I feel bad for Giants fans.
Five more years left on that contract? Suddenly I do not mind having Silva for another three years.
Screw Giants fans.
They have Lincecum and RJ.
Very true.
And we have more albatross contracts than they do.
Johjima
Silva
Washburn
Batista
Screw Giants fans, indeed.
I wouldn't call Wash or Batista giant albatross contracts anymore
they’re gone after this year and good riddance
by seattlebruin on Mar 3, 2009 11:51 AM PST up reply actions
This actually made me think of a question
Other than working out and general fitness, how do pitchers stay sharp in the off season? Hitters can take BP a few days a week, and they can do fielding drills if they want, but do pitchers throw year-round? It seems that the teams might not allow them to, so that expensive arms don’t wear out prematurely, but then how can someone like Zito expect to get better, if he can’t practice the one thing he needs to practice?
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.
I offer this with zero proof, but there's no way they sit the offseason out.
Keeping their muscle memory intact, fine tuning mechanics, working on pitches etc, all of this has to happen. I’m sure they aren’t out throwing 100 pitches a day, but wouldn’t they at least have some sort of routine?
This is what I wonder.
I know during the season they’re limited and on a really strict throwing regimen; it would make sense that they’d have some sort of program for the off season, but you never hear about it the same way that you hear about guys taking BP all winter long or learning a new position or anything like that.
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.
Golf, fishing, using a sawblade in the garage...
From what I’ve read/heard it really depends on the guy. Some hire personal trainers, use facilities at the local college or high school, that kind of thing.
Randy Wolf’s typical offseason day
1-2 p.m.: Arm and abdominal exercises in home fitness room
2-3 p.m.: Catch and long-tossing at local high school
3-4 p.m.: Running — alternating five-mile distance-run days with interval-sprint days
4-5 p.m.: Full body workout at local gym every other day
In four years, Zito's expiring contract can be a huge trade chip for them though for teams looking to dump salary!
by seattlebruin on Mar 3, 2009 11:09 AM PST up reply actions
If I was an NBA GM, about once every two years, I'd do something utterly insane
and give a high-talent, no brains player like 2/19 or something that’s ridiculously backloaded so it’s like $6M yr 1 and $13M yr 2. Then I’d hope he develops into a good player because if he does, sweet, good player for below market value.
If he keeps sucking, I’d just loudly announce to the league around the start of year 2 “HEY GUYS! I’ve got a $13M expiring contact you can have for the low, low price of a decent young player, a problem contract attached to a decent player, and a first round draft pick!”
by seattlebruin on Mar 3, 2009 11:54 AM PST up reply actions
One of the reasons I can't be a big NBA fan
Is that they have a salary cap and yet it isn’t enforced.
Why do you guys all think the Padres will win 68+ games
I mean I know odds say you will probably do better than that just because only a few teams are likely to be that bad but what hope do you see in their team?
Tough, but the Madres are up to the task.
I think 70 wins could be their ceiling. Ownership shedding salary in a bitter divorce is not a recipe for success.
They have a new owner now, at least.
The takeover will be gradual, but they’re on their way out of that mess.
At first glance I have to think there are worse teams than the Padres
by Jeff Sullivan on Mar 3, 2009 9:50 AM PST up reply actions
That tiger looks like he's on crack.
"Fights begin, finger prints are took, days is lost, bail is made, court dates are ignored, cycle is repeated."
He's probably just wowed by the "electric stuff" that Edwin Jackson is apparently showing off in Spring Training.
Patriotism, Pepper, Professionalism
Tiger's surprised face.
"Fights begin, finger prints are took, days is lost, bail is made, court dates are ignored, cycle is repeated."
just got 66/1
or um..how would the American system work that out..+6700 (I think) on the Giants to Win the World Series. Put down £50 each way.
um
not sure what you mean, damn cultural differences. What I mean is for every £1 I bet I will get £66 return plus my original stake. And by each way I mean that I get half those odds but the Giants are allowed to finish in the top two (so make the world series rather than have to win it).
Hope that makes some sense, I’m not trying to be condescending so if what I said was obvious and not what you meant I’m sorry. Stupid differences in gambling.
I guess straight up
would be what you mean.
Yup, sounds like it.
What were the odds on the Giants just winning the NL?
33/1
so they’re assuming its exactly twice as likely that they win the NL, so there doesn’t seem to be an AL>NL thought going into this, this could be the better bet.
Out of curiousity, can you get this at Ladbrokes or any brick and mortar shop?
Or did you have to go to an online site to find exotic futures like baseball?
it was 66/1 at paddypower.com and coral.co.uk
so nothing too out there
I just want the option when I'm in the UK.
I’m guessing if I strolled into a high street Thomas Hill, they’d wonder what I was talking about. Yes, I could set up an acct. on paddy power, but I’d rather not.
corals on the high street too
so if you went up to the counter I reckon they’d have it.
-115 means that you have to bet $115 in order to clear $100 profit if you win.
+1000 means that if you bet $100, you clear $1000 profit if you win.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
- The Cardinals Hall of Fame can now be found at Bill Clinton’s library in Arkansas (Huh?)
- Will Bryce Harper start the season with the Nationals?
- Mitch Mustain puts football behind him, signs reported rookie deal with White Sox
- Robinson Cano and Denzel Washington face off in Jay Leno’s Yankees trivia contest
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
