Dodgers - 140 Looks Really Good Today

**HoulihansTX** · 05-19-12, 01:51 PM

This is a reasonable play.

**LoneStar** · 05-19-12, 01:58 PM

....................

**brahmabull117** · 05-19-12, 02:03 PM

Originally posted by HoulihansTX

This is a reasonable play.

only thing I hate is injury of Matt Kemp. I can see Dodgers losing this game like 2-1 if Westbrook somehow dominates

**vrksayy** · 05-19-12, 03:10 PM

STL +130. Kershaw is dominant at home, but i believe in the spirit of saint louis.

**brahmabull117** · 05-19-12, 03:25 PM

Originally posted by vrksayy

STL +130. Kershaw is dominant at home, but i believe in the spirit of saint louis.

Kershaw is something like 13-1 his last 15 starts at home with a 1.60 era and you think +130 is good value against that?

I wouldn't back Justin Verlander on the road against Kershaw

**Fernburn74** · 05-19-12, 05:49 PM

dodgers tonight kershaw!!!!!

**No coincidences** · 05-19-12, 05:51 PM

I don't understand your line of thinking for really anything. You bring up all of these surface reasons for taking huge faves (sound like an ESPN bottom line ticker) and pretend like it's information that's not readily available to anyone and/or isn't already built into the line. Plus you talk like because it's happened in the past, it will continue to happen over and over again in the future.

I just don't get it.

**brahmabull117** · 05-19-12, 06:18 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

I don't understand your line of thinking for really anything. You bring up all of these surface reasons for taking huge faves (sound like an ESPN bottom line ticker) and pretend like it's information that's not readily available to anyone and/or isn't already built into the line. Plus you talk like because it's happened in the past, it will continue to happen over and over again in the future.

I just don't get it.

I don't look at every stat that's available, I look at the ones that are based on something deeper

Kershaw's dominance is based on his confidence at home and also his pitching style works very very well with that ballpark cause he's a flyball pitcher and it's very hard to hit homeruns there. That's why you see his incredible success there. At the same time, I'm pretty much ignoring Westbrook's extremely low era because it's anomaly that will be corrected by end of the season

You gotta look for stats that are based on something and not just statistical anomalies, big difference. Also, you need to stop believing Vegas is a 100% efficient market

The Miami Heat wouldn't be favored in their series right now if the market was 100% efficient. There's no chance in hell a team with 1 superstar, a half superstar and a bunch of scrub players down 2-1 in a series against the #3 seed in the conference should be favored to win the series

**No coincidences** · 05-19-12, 06:25 PM

Originally posted by brahmabull117

I don't look at every stat that's available, I look at the ones that are based on something deeper

You do? Because everything you post for reasoning is either just common sense or stuff you'd read in an on-line game preview.

It's "deeper" that Kershaw dominates at home?

**brahmabull117** · 05-19-12, 06:28 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

You do? Because everything you post for reasoning is either just common sense or stuff you'd read in an on-line game preview.

It's "deeper" that Kershaw dominates at home?

He dominates at home because he's a flyball/strikeout pitcher in a huge ballpark, it's just a perfect fit for his pitching style

That is based on something deeper because it will likely continue, Jake Westbrook having a 2.30 era so far is a statistical anomaly because it will not continue

Also why did you ignore my point about your belief that Vegas is a 100% efficient market? it's not, there's no way that Miami would be favored in their series in an efficient market

**No coincidences** · 05-19-12, 06:36 PM

Originally posted by brahmabull117

He dominates at home because he's a flyball/strikeout pitcher in a huge ballpark, it's just a perfect fit for his pitching style

That is based on something deeper because it will likely continue, Jake Westbrook having a 2.30 era so far is a statistical anomaly because it will not continue

Also why did you ignore my point about your belief that Vegas is a 100% efficient market? it's not, there's no way that Miami would be favored in their series in an efficient market

There is no depth to your analysis of Kershaw. Anyone with two eyes and half a brain can see what he does at home. You act like that's some kind of inside information or something.

I've never argued that Vegas is 100% efficient, but they're a hell of a lot more so than you or I. People like you who think you have some sort of "inside scoop" by playing huge ML faves or taking Boston -350 in a series bet while belittling the intelligence of professional oddsmakers just crack me up. In the end, they win and you lose. Period.

**HoulihansTX** · 05-19-12, 06:46 PM

I like the play. Finally get Kershaw @ a reasonable price, and we think of reasons to not play it?

**starfire** · 05-19-12, 06:47 PM

I bit on BigBlue!

¿
Cards

**brahmabull117** · 05-19-12, 06:53 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

There is no depth to your analysis of Kershaw. Anyone with two eyes and half a brain can see what he does at home. You act like that's some kind of inside information or something.

I've never argued that Vegas is 100% efficient, but they're a hell of a lot more so than you or I. People like you who think you have some sort of "inside scoop" by playing huge ML faves or taking Boston -350 in a series bet while belittling the intelligence of professional oddsmakers just crack me up. In the end, they win and you lose. Period.

My 2 bets I've supported today was a +120 for Indiana and a - 140 for LA, that's an avg play of - 110 so I'm not doing big ML faves. Pretty much all of the NFL season I did -110 or -120 teasers and some totals plays and I finished the NFL season on an excellent streak

Anyways, the way Vegas sets lines is that they have a preset power ranking system that they base their lines on. They're right on the money with the majority of their plays but some of them are just not accurate because their power rankings are not accurate. The line here is only -140 because Vegas believes westbrook is a similar caliber pitcher to Kershaw so far because westbrook has posted similar numbers, but the odds of those numbers continuing for Westbrook are very small

The point is professionals make mistakes in sports. Look at the NFL draft, how many times have teams made awful picks on clear risk players that did not pan out? How many times do great athletes make mistakes where you have no idea why they did what they did (IE throwing a ball into triple coverage)? You just gotta study the information and look for where they made a mistake. I'm not saying that I can outsmart vegas on all their lines, I think they're right on point maybe 80-90% of the time, you just gotta find that 1 or 2 games in a day where they're not on point

**brahmabull117** · 05-19-12, 06:59 PM

Originally posted by HoulihansTX

I like the play. Finally get Kershaw @ a reasonable price, and we think of reasons to not play it?

you know people like No Coin think that Vegas is 100% sharp and that any lines that looks really good is just a trap

**No coincidences** · 05-19-12, 07:42 PM

Originally posted by HoulihansTX

I like the play. Finally get Kershaw @ a reasonable price, and we think of reasons to not play it?

I'm not necessarily saying it's a bad play. I just laugh at the logic he tries to pass as "digging deeper."

**No coincidences** · 05-19-12, 07:43 PM

Originally posted by brahmabull117

you know people like No Coin think that Vegas is 100% sharp and that any lines that looks really good is just a trap

Exaggerating my opinion of Vegas oddsmakers only makes you look more desperate in trying to prove whatever "point" it is you're looking for here.

**No coincidences** · 05-19-12, 07:44 PM

Originally posted by brahmabull117

The line here is only -140 because Vegas believes westbrook is a similar caliber pitcher to Kershaw so far because westbrook has posted similar numbers, but the odds of those numbers continuing for Westbrook are very small

So let me get this straight: Vegas isn't factoring in any kind of "regression" possibility when it sets its line for Jake Westbrook? But you are?

**Squirrel Kokomo** · 05-19-12, 08:02 PM

Originally posted by brahmabull117

Kershaw is something like 13-1 his last 15 starts at home with a 1.60 era and you think +130 is good value against that?

just lol logic. you missed a few variables.

**Squirrel Kokomo** · 05-19-12, 08:03 PM

Originally posted by brahmabull117

you know people like No Coin think that Vegas is 100% sharp and that any lines that looks really good is just a trap

how many units is he up this season? how many are you?

**No coincidences** · 05-19-12, 08:06 PM

Originally posted by Squirrel Kokomo

how many units is he up this season? how many are you?

I'm not saying I'm god's gift to capping, but the elementary way this cat picks bets never ceases to amaze me. To say that he's "digging deeper" here just makes me about fall out of my chair.

**No coincidences** · 05-19-12, 08:08 PM

Los Angeles Dodgers Career statistics vs. Jake Westbrook
BATTER	AB	H	2B	3B	HR	RBI	BB	SO	AVG	OBP	SLG	OPS
Bobby Abreu	7	1	0	0	0	1	2	1	.143	.333	.143	.476
Mark Ellis	24	5	1	0	0	3	1	2	.208	.240	.250	.490
Jerry Hairston Jr.	12	2	0	0	0	1	0	3	.167	.231	.167	.397
Adam Kennedy	16	3	0	0	0	0	1	2	.188	.235	.188	.423
Juan Rivera	9	2	1	0	0	1	0	3	.222	.222	.333	.556
Matt Treanor	6	2	0	0	1	1	0	1	.333	.333	.833	1.167
Juan Uribe	33	6	0	0	2	4	1	4	.182	.206	.364	.570
Totals	107	21	2	0	3	11	5	16	.196	.239	.299	.538

**Squirrel Kokomo** · 05-19-12, 08:09 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

I'm not saying I'm god's gift to capping, but the elementary way this cat picks bets never ceases to amaze me. To say that he's "digging deeper" here just makes me about fall out of my chair.

Kershaw is something like 13-1 his last 15 starts at home with a 1.60 era and you think +130 is good value against that?

**HoulihansTX** · 05-19-12, 08:22 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

I'm not necessarily saying it's a bad play. I just laugh at the logic he tries to pass as "digging deeper."

goes without saying.

**hardball** · 05-19-12, 08:32 PM

Eyeballing a pitchers ERA is pointless....

I can list meaningless stats too:

The Dodgers are 0-8 since May 19, 2010 as a home favorite after a win in which they scored at least six runs. (Fact).

That being said. Kershaw's advanced stats show he might be due for some regression.

Hope not, I'm a big fan.

**No coincidences** · 05-19-12, 08:38 PM

Originally posted by hardball

Eyeballing a pitchers ERA is pointless....

I can list meaningless stats too:

The Dodgers are 0-8 since May 19, 2010 as a home favorite after a win in which they scored at least six runs. (Fact).

That being said. Kershaw's advanced stats show he might be due for some regression.

Hope not, I'm a big fan.

I have Kershaw on my fantasy team. He's been good this season, but not nearly as dominant as he was a year ago.

**Balco10** · 05-19-12, 08:53 PM

Originally posted by brahmabull117

only thing I hate is injury of Matt Kemp. I can see Dodgers losing this game like 2-1 if Westbrook somehow dominates

So take the freaking under 6!

**brahmabull117** · 05-19-12, 09:12 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

I have Kershaw on my fantasy team. He's been good this season, but not nearly as dominant as he was a year ago.

he has a lower Era and lower whip than last year, what in the world are you talking about?

Originally posted by No coincidences

I'm not saying I'm god's gift to capping, but the elementary way this cat picks bets never ceases to amaze me.

Didn't bruce Lee once say that "simplicity is key to briliance"?

**brahmabull117** · 05-19-12, 09:12 PM

Originally posted by Balco10

So take the freaking under 6!

there are no words to describe how awful total plays are in baseball

i'm not interested in betting on coin flips

**No coincidences** · 05-19-12, 09:15 PM

Originally posted by brahmabull117

he has a lower Era and lower whip than last year, what in the world are you talking about?

I'm talking about actually watching him pitch.

**brahmabull117** · 05-19-12, 09:18 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

I'm talking about actually watching him pitch.

So he's not nearly as good as last year, yet is putting up better stats across the board?

**No coincidences** · 05-19-12, 09:24 PM

Originally posted by brahmabull117

So he's not nearly as good as last year, yet is putting up better stats across the board?

Have you watched him pitch? Yes or no.

**brahmabull117** · 05-19-12, 09:26 PM

Originally posted by No coincidences

Have you watched him pitch? Yes or no.

yes, 2 games, not all of them though - I watched his last game cause I had money on it

regardless, claiming that he's not nearly as dominant with superior stats is beyond retarded

**No coincidences** · 05-19-12, 09:29 PM

Originally posted by brahmabull117

yes, 2 games, not all of them though - I watched his last game cause I had money on it

regardless, claiming that he's not nearly as dominant with superior stats is beyond retarded

Check out his advanced stats.