tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7965585998403674176.post-21356250280780385012008-04-30T17:45:00.003-04:002008-05-01T11:00:31.126-04:002008-05-01T11:00:31.126-04:00<span>Sorry about the lack of posts over the past couple days. Finals week.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Last week:</span><br />Atlanta, 40:1; now 30:1<br />Cleveland, 17:1; now 12:1<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">This week:</span><br /><br /></span><span style="font-weight: bold;">Oakland, 75:1 (<a href="http://www.betus.com/"><span style="text-decoration: underline;">BetUS</span></a>)</span><br />Current Record: 17-12<br /><a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/ps_oddspec.php">PECOTA Playoff Odds</a>: 33.3%<br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Tampa Bay, 125:1 (<span style="text-decoration: underline;">BetUS</span><a href="http://www.vip.com/?skin=sports/?CampaignID=65946"></a>)</span><br />Current Record: 15-12<br />PECOTA: 36.8%<br /><br />Some books are giving these guys respect, but not all of them, causing for some huge gaps. You can still get Oakland at 75:1, but they're 20:1 at Sportsbook. BetUS decided to increase Tampa's odds from 80:1 to 125:1 (not sure how you can explain that), but they're down to 60:1 at VIP.<br /><br />Even more encouraging than the impressive records of these two teams is that they are legitimate assessments of their performance so far. Looking at <a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/standings.php">BP's Adjusted Standings</a>, the Rays have the best third-order record in the East, and Oakland easily has the best third-order record in the West. At least in April, both of these teams have played like legitimate contenders.<br /><br />The A's have scored a lot of runs (135, fourth in the league), but they're not going to continue to hit .309/.407/.431 with RISP.<br /><br />The Rays are now on pace to allow 654 runs, which is somewhat absurd. They are third in the majors in <a href="http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/sortable/index.php?cid=204024">Defensive Efficiency</a>. And Kazmir <a href="http://nationalpost.pa-sportsticker.com/default.aspx?s=mlb-news-display&amp;nid=A19365161209581704A">makes his return</a> on Sunday. They're still 25:1 to win the East at BetUS, by the way.<br /><br />In less optimistic news, Dave Cameron has a <a href="http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/dont-call-it-a-comeback/">post at FanGraphs</a> (some <a href="http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/">great stuff</a> over there recently) about how Eric Hinske is not likely to continue hitting .292/.407/.639.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Cincinnati, 150:1 (VIP)</span><br />Current Record: 12-17<br />PECOTA: 7.92%<br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Texas, 1000:1 (VIP)<br /></span>Current Record: 10-18<br />PECOTA: 3.82%<span style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-weight: bold;"><br /></span></span><br />Some wacky lines at VIP. The best you can do in the Reds elsewhere is 80:1, and 200:1 for Texas. I think they're able to do this because of their low limits. The site is down right now so I can't double check this, but I'm pretty sure that the max "to win" on these bets is $5,000, so they're really not exposing themselves that much. Some sites have the max bet at $500; if someone maxed out the Rangers, and they somehow made a run, they'd stand to lose half a million dollars. Not the case with VIP's low limits, so they can be a little more liberal.<br /><br />The Rangers are worth a $5 at that price, I would think. I mean come on, it's still the AL West.<br /><br />Not much else out there this week. The Dodgers are 35:1 at VIP, which seems high. Should have a post with an update on the leaders of the MLB totals contest up a little later.Vegas Watchhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02353166004125421683VegasWatch@gmail.com