More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Jonah Keri

Jonah Keri

Posted: March 11, 2010 05:47 PM

2010 MLB Over/Unders

What's Your Reaction:

Every year around this time, I exchange emails with a smart baseball friend -- we'll call him Rollie. The conversation starts with me asking if Rollie has seen an updated list of Over/Under Win totals for MLB teams. A few days later, he collects his list, emails it to me, and we spend the next few days debating the most interesting lines. That conversation nets some of the most compelling baseball talk I'll have all year.

The first year we broke down the lines, I found myself having to fight hard against my first problem as a baseball fan and writer: biases against lousy teams. Nothing brings out the fears and assumptions of a baseball fan more than hard predictions, with odds attached. What I learned was that you can't look at the Washington Nationals and Kansas City Royals as uninteresting or even hopeless. The sharps that set the lines every year want to create attractive wagering possibilities on every team. They know that people will love the New York Yankees and Boston Red Sox and hate the perennial doormats. So they'll adjust the lines accordingly to even out the action on both sides.

The second lesson learned was to always consider context. You might think the Houston Astros are an old, boring team this year (or any time in the past four years, really). But they also play in a division that's usually stuffed with mediocre to awful teams. So if you're trying to pin down their expected results in any given year, you have to consider the environment in which they play, and baseball's unbalanced schedule.

Last, and here's where you can separate the novices from the true degenerates like myself who spend way too much time thinking about this stuff: You need to consider how each individual front office operates.

Back to the Astros for a second. Regardless of which GM has been in charge, Owner Drayton McLane has passed down the same philosophy for as long as he's owned the team: Never sell off your stars, and never rebuild. The Astros could have done themselves a huge favor by trading Lance Berkman and Roy Oswalt two or three years ago, reloading a barren farm system. But that's now how McLane rolls. He believes the team benefits from having recognizable faces on the ballclub, and that those brand-name players will draw fans to the ballpark and stimulate revenue in general, even when those players are past their prime. Forget Berkman and Oswalt for a second: The Astros kept Craig Biggio long past his expiry date as a plus player, ostensibly so he could collect his 3000th hit in Houston and retire as an Astro. Jeff Bagwell made nearly $20 million in 2006 thanks to the owner's largesse; he played exactly zero games that season.

Teams that refuse to pack it in or look to the future can often make great, sneaky Over bets, because their level of play won't likely drop off after the trade deadline. Conversely, teams that are aggressive about turning over rosters, stockpiling prospects and saving money, can make great Under bets, if the line is right. Even then, though, you need to throw in an extra caveat: Don't bet the Under on a team likely to sell off veterans in July, if they have prospects waiting on the farm who are as good or better than the guys they're replacing.

This will be the fourth year I've reviewed the lines and made decisions accordingly. Now, I would NEVER EVER make an illegal bet on a sporting outcome - that would be terribly wrong. But if you're planning to be in Las Vegas between now and Opening Day (March Madness is just around the corner, and the first four days of the tourney are insane in Vegas), there are some nice betting opportunities on this year's slate. Since I won't be in Vegas this year, I will be making my usual wager of gummi bears. They're fruity, chewy and delicious!

2009 marked the third straight gummi-winning year for me. I pooled all my bears into one wager: the Tigers, over 83 Wins, at +115. You will almost never see me taking a teams when the odds are negative, nothing at -120 or worse, for instance (for you newbies, -120 means you're betting $120 to win $100; +115 means you're betting $100 to win $115). Baseball is rife with uncertainty, so best to focus on bets that double your gummi output or better. I'm not a big believer in diversifying either. Why make three bets you like and two you're not sure about - potentially diluting your winnings or worse - when you can make one or two wagers with conviction? Finally, all things being equal, I prefer to take the Under. Aggregate odds tend to lean slightly in favor of Under bets anyway; plus, a whole season of schadenfreude is strangely satisfying.

My picks are below. The numbers in brackets represent projections made by Sean Smith's CHONE projection system, The Hardball Times, Baseball Prospectus' PECOTA system, and for fun, baseball superscribe Joe Posnanski. The idea is simply that we have some numbers out there that you can compare to the Vegas odds in making your picks. As always, you'll want to do some research beyond those big, broad numbers.

(Also, these are for GUMMI BEAR PURPOSES ONLY. I'm not looking for credit if you win so many gummis that you need a root canal, nor blame if you go into candy debt.)

With all of that in mind, here are my three favorite picks for 2010:

Chicago White Sox under 82.5 (81) ...+110
My first Over/Under win ever was an Under on the White Sox, in 2007. Mainstream media and fans loved them coming off a 90-win season in '06, just two years removed from winning the World Series. Instead, the Pale Hose won just 72 games in '07; I was counting my stack of gummis by early August. The team has slowly incorporated a few younger players onto the roster to try to remedy some of the problems they had before with an old, slow roster. But this team still lacks the kind of across-the-board, dynamic talent you'd want to see in a contender. Gordon Beckham, Alexei Ramirez, John Danks and Gavin Floyd are nice building blocks. But this team still has too many Konerkos and Pierzynskis, and is still putting too much faith in Jake Peavy, a once-great pitcher coming off a major injury, transplanted to a tougher division in a tougher league in a much tougher ballpark that yields copious home runs.

Short 'em.

Tampa Bay Rays Over 88.5 (88, 92, 94, 86) ...Even
If the Rays played in any other division, this would be a lay-up. But then we remember the lesson of context. Tampa Bay Rays General Manager Andrew Friedman called this year's club the best in franchise history. That's pretty impressive, considering the Rays won 97 games and an AL pennant two years ago. But in a division with the loaded Yankees and Red Sox and the improving Baltimore Orioles, how much can we expect from the Rays?

Here's where I battle biases. I'm in the final stages of writing a book about the Rays (ESPN Books/Ballantine, Spring 2011). Having interviewed scads of players, coaches, executives, and others on and around the team, it's easy to fall into the trap of rooting for them, and possibly overestimating their talent. My self-check, oddly, is the Montreal Expos. I grew up cheering desperately for the Expos, only to see them fall short every year. Despite the natural optimism that comes with being a fan, I was also realistic about their chances, and rarely got excited when it wasn't warranted (except in 1994, but that's another story for a great Commissioner who deserves to be made into a statue - Han Solo-style, that is).

All of that means I think I'm capable of evaluating the Rays without dwelling on what a fascinating guy Gabe Kapler is, or how I could talk to Fernando Perez for two hours and wish for four more (that actually happened, matter of fact). And what I see is a team that made solid improvement in acquiring Rafael Soriano for the bullpen and Kelly Shoppach behind the plate, to go with an improving rotation and a solid lineup that could improve if B.J. Upton and Pat Burrell bounce back. The Rays are too good not to win 90-plus, even in the loaded AL East. The Hardball Times and PECOTA both agree, emphatically.

(NOTE: I will of course be steering clear of the Rays, for obvious reasons. Too big a can of worms for me to wager, even gummi worms.)

Atlanta Braves +350 to win NL East
One of the things I've noticed since starting these annual exercises is that the sharps have gotten smarter. The spread of projection systems like PECOTA, CHONE and ZIPS gives everyone - including Vegas - a chance to think analytically along with the rest of us, and also predict where people might lay their money. That means fewer and fewer great over/under opportunities every year.

With that in mind, we're taking the Braves to usurp the Phillies in the NL East. That +350 line is amazing for a team this good. The Braves trot out a deep starting rotation led by Jair Jurrjens, a now-healthy Tim Hudson and young ace Tommy Hanson. They're very good up the middle, led by Brian McCann and Yunel Escobar. And the great, big wild card is Jason Heyward, who's hit so many bombs during spring training that Braves employees are considering parking their cars in Alabama.

The Phils bring back their loaded infield, along with Jayson Werth, Shane Victorino, and a pitching staff now led by the great Roy Halladay. But they still have a shaky bullpen, they've had a long run of great health, and they might be due for some bad luck this season. Considering the Giants - whose lineup is completely miserable outside of Pablo Sandoval - are a mere +300 to win the NL West, this Braves line looks too good to pass up.

Cross-posted at JonahKeri.com

 
 
 

Follow Jonah Keri on Twitter: www.twitter.com/jonahkeri

 
 
  • Comments
  • 7
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
01:09 PM on 03/15/2010
As a Phillies fan I am nervous about the Braves. They only finished 7 back in 2009 and they will be on the "Do It for Bobby" wagon all year.
12:29 AM on 03/12/2010
Ok, fine...I'll be the commenter contrarian. If you said, who is most likely to win the NL East?, I would say the Phillies. But I think +350 is WAY too high for the Braves, and I think they're a sneaky wild card pick. Like Jonah said, if anything happens to the Phillies from an injury standpoint, the Braves are the team best-poised to take advantage. Also, look for Glaus to have a nice comeback year at first base.

And I like whatever the over is on the Padres...their pitching staff is sneaky good, and the NL West, as always, sucks.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Jonah Keri
Sports writer/Stock market writer
11:20 AM on 03/12/2010
What Anteater Homer said. Making picks/gummi wagers is all about value. Who do I think is going to win the NL East? The Phillies, sure. Do I consider it a stone-cold lock? No, I don't. Which team would be most likely to unseat the Phillies? To me it's the Braves. What are the odds? +350! You bet $100 to win $350. Those are monumental odds for a team that's pretty darn good.

Frankly the fact that the Braves pick is being met with skepticism, both here and elsewhere, only makes me feel better about the pick. Vegas purposely prices the odds the way they do to entice action on both sides. If even at +350 people are scoffing at the Braves, by Vegas contrarian logic, that's an excellent sign.

And I agree on the Over for the Padres too. They're being completely disrespected (O/Us around 69-70) and they probably won't be that bad.
07:37 PM on 03/13/2010
Keep in mind that the Braves had one of the worst hitting teams in baseball last year (they got better after the All-Star Break, however), and with their pitching they managed to stay in it until the last week or so of the season. They could even afford to lose Vasquez and still have about the best starting five in baseball. The bullpen is pretty solid, too, with Medlin, Moylan, O'Flaherty, Wagner, and Saito. Toss Glaus and Heyward into the mix, who will in turn make Chipper and McCann better, and you have a recipe for something special. Great pitching, good defense and timely hitting (not to mention a pretty deep bench) have won more than a few World Series.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tom Theodosiades
12:14 AM on 03/12/2010
Hahahahahaha, the Braves, really? Do you watch baseball? If the Braves want to usurp the Phillies, they better figure out how to beat them in Atlanta, lol.
09:26 PM on 03/11/2010
Wow. Your Braves prognostication is waaaaaaaaaaaaaay off. You're lucky you're only wagering Gummi Bears! The Phillies this season will be unstoppable. I do wish they kept Cliff Lee while adding Hallday as well, but their bullpen shouldn't have to do quite as much work with Halladay, Happ, and Hamels keeping the opposition to minimal runs. If Polanco hits like he has, and HOPEFULLY gets more comfortable at 3rd nothing is going to get past the Phillies infield. Their infield makes up the 1,2,3,4 of their line-up as well. How bout them apples?
Most importantly the Philies have a franchise that EVERYONE wants to be with. Lee is SAD to be gone. Park is upset that he was traded from the Phils to the Yankees, Burrell yearns to be back with them. Charlie Manuel is adored by his players. Amaro is making some very smart moves in the front office and the Phillies PHANS are PHANATICS. They will retain their Championship status. You'll owe me some Gummi Bears.
08:00 PM on 03/11/2010
LMAO! Braves aren't even close to "usurping" the Phillies. A weathered TIm Hudson and unproven Hanson with Jair isn't a deep starting rotation. You're high if you think so. The Phillies, meanwhile, trot out the same talent as last year but with a better pitcher in place of Lee. The Braves don't have half the line-up of Philadelphia. Any integrity to write about baseball went out the window with that graph.