This article is part of our MLB Picks series.
When it comes to betting on MLB, there are a few types of games that tend to produce a solid ROI. Betting underdogs in games with higher over/under totals, for instance, can generate solid returns, and there's always the old "fade the public" contrarian standby. Aside from looking at overall betting trends, however, there are also some statistical guidelines that could produce strong betting opportunities, and that's what this column will focus on.
The moneylines listed will be from the night before, so a big disparity before game time means there's been some significant action on one side or a major last-minute lineup change (such as a switch in starting pitcher).
Let's take a look at the lines that spark some interest for Wednesday, April 27
San Diego (Andrew Cashner) at San Francisco (Jeff Samardzija), 3:45 pm ET: +160/-170
This is a tricky one. The over/under of 7.5 doesn't suggest enough volatility to put this game in the sweet spot for betting underdogs, but the public is firmly behind the Giants (75 percent of moneyline bets right now) with the Padres having dropped four straight games. Cashner is also a pitcher whose ERA typically lags behind his SIERA, if not with a particularly large spread (4.34 ERA vs. 4.00 SIERA in 2015, 4.29 vs. 3.80 so far this season). Samardzija, however, has flipped things around in 2016, going from a 4.96 ERA/4.18 SIERA last year with the White Sox to a 3.00 ERA/4.12 SIERA
When it comes to betting on MLB, there are a few types of games that tend to produce a solid ROI. Betting underdogs in games with higher over/under totals, for instance, can generate solid returns, and there's always the old "fade the public" contrarian standby. Aside from looking at overall betting trends, however, there are also some statistical guidelines that could produce strong betting opportunities, and that's what this column will focus on.
The moneylines listed will be from the night before, so a big disparity before game time means there's been some significant action on one side or a major last-minute lineup change (such as a switch in starting pitcher).
Let's take a look at the lines that spark some interest for Wednesday, April 27
San Diego (Andrew Cashner) at San Francisco (Jeff Samardzija), 3:45 pm ET: +160/-170
This is a tricky one. The over/under of 7.5 doesn't suggest enough volatility to put this game in the sweet spot for betting underdogs, but the public is firmly behind the Giants (75 percent of moneyline bets right now) with the Padres having dropped four straight games. Cashner is also a pitcher whose ERA typically lags behind his SIERA, if not with a particularly large spread (4.34 ERA vs. 4.00 SIERA in 2015, 4.29 vs. 3.80 so far this season). Samardzija, however, has flipped things around in 2016, going from a 4.96 ERA/4.18 SIERA last year with the White Sox to a 3.00 ERA/4.12 SIERA through four starts with San Francisco. It's probably too early to start relying heavily on 2016 numbers to guide decisions, but Samardzija and the Giants do seem overvalued to me.
Recommendation: None, as there will be better spots in which to place a bet
Philadelphia (Jeremy Hellickson) at Washington (Gio Gonzalez), 7:05 pm ET: +185/-200
Big numbers get my attention, especially when the public is hammering the favorite (84 percent of the moneyline action right now is on the Nationals). The o/u is too low at 7.5, and although it might rise as betting on the over is also running at 66 percent, it probably won't reach the 8.5 we're looking for by game time. On the other hand, Hellickson (4.62 ERA vs. 4.14 SIERA last year, 5.21 vs. 3.33 through four starts this year) could be hugely undervalued while Gonzalez's 1.42 ERA vs. 3.13 SIERA in 2016 suggests some regression is on the way. If you trust those 2016 SIERAs, the two pitchers are roughly equal -- which makes this line far too high. Again, it's too early in the season to fully trust them. Also, the heavy action is likely to push the Phillies above +200 at some point, and that takes the odds out of the ideal underdog scenario as well.
Recommendation: None, tempting as it is to go after those seemingly huge odds (that's foreshadowing, by the way)
Atlanta (Bud Norris) at Boston (Steven Wright), 7:10 pm ET: +170/-180
Man, there are a lot of big road dogs today. This one looks a lot better than the two listed above, however. The o/u is at 8.5 and rising, while the Red Sox are getting 77 percent of the moneyline action. That is an awful lot of confidence to put in an unproven knuckleballer whose 1.40 ERA to begin the season isn't within spitting distance of his 4.17 SIERA, even if the guy on the bump for the other team has his own issues (Norris' 4.62 SIERA this year would be a huge improvement on his 6.75 ERA). The only thing stopping this game being a two-unit wager for me is that it's in Boston. The Braves may be the worst team in baseball, but the numbers suggest they're worth betting on, as in the long run these kinds of dogs will pay off in the aggregate even if they aren't all winners. As some guy once said, "If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving definitely isn't for you."
Recommendation: Back the Braves (one unit) at +170
Oakland (Sonny Gray) at Detroit (Justin Verlander), 7:10 pm ET: -115/+105
No, those odds aren't reversed. Verlander and the Tigers are slight home dogs today, and the line could climb further as 65 percent of the moneyline bets are on the A's. The reason is easy to see, as Gray has a 2.73 ERA this year against Verlander's 5.79 ERA, but their respective SIERAs (3.78 vs. 3.66) tell a very different story. This isn't the ideal situation when it comes to odds or o/u (a little shy at 8.0), but the perception of each pitcher at the moment presents an opportunity so I'm willing to go off-script on this one.
Recommendation: Back the Tigers (one unit) at +105
Milwaukee (Taylor Jungmann) at Chicago Cubs (Jake Arrieta), 8:05 pm ET: +290/-330
What is going on here? Even with these utterly ridiculous odds, the Cubs are getting 85 percent of the moneyline bets. It's just goofy. People placing $10 bets are going to net about $3, assuming Chicago wins. Why bother? On general principle, people should be betting on the Brewers, as even though Jungmann stinks he's not quite as bad as his bloated ERA suggests (8.47 ERA vs. 5.24 SIERA). Arrieta's absurd 0.87 ERA on the season also hides a, well...OK fine, his 3.09 SIERA is still really good. I mean, let's not kid ourselves. The Cubs should win this game handily. But in the modern era, no team should be getting these kinds of odds. The 2016 Cubs are not the 1927 Yankees, and the 2016 Brewers are not the 1962 Mets.
Recommendation: Back the Brewers (one unit) at +290, because how can you not?
YTD performance: 3-3, plus 2.95 units, ROI plus 42.14%
