Los Angeles Dodgers @ Chicago Cubs
Series line: LAD +198, CHC -218
Game 1: LAD (Lowe) +145 @ CHC (Dempster) -153
All of these lines are from Pinnacle.
This series line is totally ridiculous. The Game 1 line indicates that the Cubs have a 59.7% chance of winning. Game 1 is, pretty clearly, the best matchup for Chicago. After that, it's Billingsley at Zambrano, which is a much better pairing from the Dodgers' perspective, especially after considering the questions about Zambrano's arm. Harden at Kuroda in Game 3 is the best pitching matchup of the series for Chicago, but since the game is in LA, the line will probably be about 20 cents shorter than Wednesday's line. Game 4 will be Lilly/Dempster at Kershaw/Maddux/Lowe. It's almost impossible to handicap that one, since the pitchers will depend on which team is up 2-1, but there's no possible matchup there that favors the Cubs by more than the G1 line. The same is true for a potential fifth game; the best matchup Chicago can hope for would be a Lowe-Dempster rematch.
If each of the five games had an line of CHC -153, and the Cubs had a 59.7% chance of winning each game, we'd expect Chicago to win the series 67.7% of the time. The fair line in that situation would be -210/+210. We have just very clearly established that the lines for Games 2-4 are going to make LA's outlook look much better than this scenario, yet the you can get the Dodgers at just 12 cents worse than that, even after juice. There is definitely a significant amount of value in the LA +198 for the series.
As Sal Baxamusa pointed out on THT Live yesterday, these two offenses are a lot closer than you'd think. He ran updated projections on each team's offense, and discovered that the Dodgers would be expected to score 5.18 R/G against a league-average pitcher, while the Cubs come in at 5.12. LA's number is assuming that Torre plays Kemp over Pierre in each game--certainly not a given--but it's still surprising that the Dodgers come out on top. Despite the great second halves from both Ramirez and Kemp, the Dodgers actually underperformed after trading for Manny, scoring 4.63 R/G in the last two months.
Losing Kuo--who has been brilliant, with a 96:21 K:BB ratio and just four homers allowed in 80 innings--hurts, but it's not like the Dodgers are lacking for relievers. The bullpen put up a 3.34 ERA this year, even with Saito missing two months. Beimel, Broxton, and Wade have all been fantastic; even Chan Ho Park, despite being a bit homer prone, has had a good year.
The back end of Chicago's bullpen is similarly strong, with Wood and Marmol, but they're not nearly as deep. It's great that Samardzija played for Notre Dame and throws hard and all, but he's in way over his head. He has walked 15 guys in 27.7 innings; his ERA is only so low (2.28) because he's yet to allow a homer, despite a GB rate that's only average.
The Cubs have a clear advantage on defense, as they rank second in baseball with a defensive efficiency of .705. The Dodgers were average on the year, at .691, and are worse now with Manny out there instead of Pierre.
Overall, the Cubs are the better team, and they do have home-field. But the Dodgers are significantly better than most are giving them credit for, and definitely have more than a 1 in 3 chance of advancing.
3 comments:
Is there potential that there will be even greater value in LA if they happen to lose game one? I feel like there's a huge potential for the public to overreact to the first results and buy up the price on the series pretty high on Matchbook.
That's entirely possible, we can cross that bridge when we get to it. Hopefully we don't have to.
You can make a strong case for the Dogs in both series (LAD and MIL), but I can't fathom them winning the series outright.
I'd take a shot with the Dodgers and stay away from the Brewers on account of the perceived ability of their respective pitching staffs (LA underrated, MIL just not that good). The Brewers saving grace might be the staff of the Phillies could perform down to the level of their own.
Post a Comment