WEBVTT - Beating The Book: 2019 Q2 MLB Derivative Stats Show

0:00:03.440 --> 0:00:11.880
<v Speaker 1>Check it down, man now down then Monday morning, June

0:00:13.080 --> 0:00:17.079
<v Speaker 1>and Eating of this podcast, Jill Alexander, m lb Q

0:00:17.360 --> 0:00:19.720
<v Speaker 1>two derivative show. You know how we do this. We

0:00:19.800 --> 0:00:21.680
<v Speaker 1>do it each and every year on the Beating the

0:00:21.680 --> 0:00:24.560
<v Speaker 1>Book podcast. The Mariners are past the halfway point that

0:00:24.600 --> 0:00:27.120
<v Speaker 1>gives us license to do it. We'll talk MLB betting

0:00:27.920 --> 0:00:32.199
<v Speaker 1>stats through the perspective of money line wagers, as if

0:00:32.200 --> 0:00:34.920
<v Speaker 1>you're betting these teams each every day bizarro exercise, but

0:00:35.440 --> 0:00:37.760
<v Speaker 1>teaches us stuff about each and every one of these

0:00:37.800 --> 0:00:41.240
<v Speaker 1>ball clubs from a betting standpoint money line, home road splits,

0:00:41.400 --> 0:00:44.360
<v Speaker 1>run line, a sort of de facto power ranking. I

0:00:44.400 --> 0:00:48.320
<v Speaker 1>should say not to mention starting pitching stats, umpire over

0:00:48.479 --> 0:00:52.080
<v Speaker 1>under who's reliable, who's not from that perspective, and of

0:00:52.080 --> 0:00:54.360
<v Speaker 1>course that it gets a little more proprietary first five

0:00:54.400 --> 0:00:58.440
<v Speaker 1>inning stats as well as first inning pitching performance. You

0:00:58.480 --> 0:01:00.640
<v Speaker 1>won't find that anywhere else but right here on the

0:01:00.680 --> 0:01:04.440
<v Speaker 1>podcast mlb Q two Derivatives, right here on the Beating

0:01:04.440 --> 0:01:07.720
<v Speaker 1>of the Book podcast. Enjoy this is a numbers game

0:01:07.760 --> 0:01:10.920
<v Speaker 1>with Gil Alexander broadcasting only on the Vegas Stats and

0:01:10.959 --> 0:01:16.480
<v Speaker 1>Information Networks. On those gidiots who believe in analytics, analytics,

0:01:16.480 --> 0:01:19.160
<v Speaker 1>statistics and more are used to win wagers, and Gil

0:01:19.280 --> 0:01:22.400
<v Speaker 1>has every number you need to cash your tickets now

0:01:22.760 --> 0:01:25.280
<v Speaker 1>live from the Visan Studios in the South Point Hotel

0:01:25.280 --> 0:01:28.720
<v Speaker 1>and Casino. It's Gil Alexander. It is a numbers game.

0:01:28.760 --> 0:01:30.440
<v Speaker 1>Good morning to you on a Monday morning here at

0:01:30.480 --> 0:01:33.200
<v Speaker 1>Serious XM Channel two oh forts where sports betting analytics

0:01:33.280 --> 0:01:38.000
<v Speaker 1>live actionable sports betting information. Gil Alexander. Um, So here's

0:01:38.000 --> 0:01:40.160
<v Speaker 1>the deal today on the show, you happen to land

0:01:40.160 --> 0:01:41.920
<v Speaker 1>on the one day, Kelly, the one day you're here,

0:01:42.200 --> 0:01:46.160
<v Speaker 1>you happen to land on our Q two Derivatives MLB show,

0:01:46.400 --> 0:01:50.240
<v Speaker 1>So Major League Baseball Derivative betting stats show, which we

0:01:50.280 --> 0:01:53.160
<v Speaker 1>do every quarter here Q one, Q two, Q three.

0:01:53.200 --> 0:01:56.200
<v Speaker 1>So one team has rounded the uh the midway bend.

0:01:56.480 --> 0:01:58.360
<v Speaker 1>So we took that as an opportunity to do the show.

0:01:58.400 --> 0:02:00.800
<v Speaker 1>The Mariners are past the halfway more arc here of

0:02:00.800 --> 0:02:02.280
<v Speaker 1>the MLB season. They got a bit of a head

0:02:02.280 --> 0:02:05.200
<v Speaker 1>start on folks, and so today on the show, if

0:02:05.240 --> 0:02:08.600
<v Speaker 1>you are a baseball nerd uh man, is this nirvana

0:02:08.680 --> 0:02:10.320
<v Speaker 1>for you? By the way, if you are not, I'll

0:02:10.320 --> 0:02:12.560
<v Speaker 1>just try to say silly things and maybe entertain you. Anyway, right,

0:02:12.600 --> 0:02:16.000
<v Speaker 1>which not so yeah, this was you know Covery baseball.

0:02:16.080 --> 0:02:19.240
<v Speaker 1>It covered the Bartles years ago. I've moved on from

0:02:19.280 --> 0:02:22.160
<v Speaker 1>baseball since covering the Barley. The covering of the Barlos

0:02:22.200 --> 0:02:24.480
<v Speaker 1>will help you kill your interest in baseball. Do you

0:02:24.639 --> 0:02:26.040
<v Speaker 1>do you have a cold? Kelly? You sound like you've

0:02:26.040 --> 0:02:29.040
<v Speaker 1>been under the bat a cold right now? Okay? All right,

0:02:29.160 --> 0:02:31.160
<v Speaker 1>well feel better. Trying to get you some medication during

0:02:31.160 --> 0:02:32.360
<v Speaker 1>the show, and we'll see what happens to you by

0:02:32.400 --> 0:02:34.079
<v Speaker 1>the end of the show. All right. So what that

0:02:34.160 --> 0:02:36.760
<v Speaker 1>means today is not only will we have we'll have

0:02:36.840 --> 0:02:39.440
<v Speaker 1>little interludes. Paul Spore from fan Graphs will show up.

0:02:39.440 --> 0:02:42.200
<v Speaker 1>We'll talk to him about baseball in general, beyond betting

0:02:42.200 --> 0:02:44.720
<v Speaker 1>how he feels about We'll do it through abetting prism

0:02:44.800 --> 0:02:47.560
<v Speaker 1>division odds with what's going on in each divisions Paul

0:02:47.560 --> 0:02:50.640
<v Speaker 1>Sport from fan Graphs. We will also have Jason Weingarten

0:02:50.680 --> 0:02:52.080
<v Speaker 1>at the end of the show to talk with us

0:02:52.440 --> 0:02:55.880
<v Speaker 1>about his bets of the day, which sometimes and most

0:02:55.919 --> 0:02:59.240
<v Speaker 1>often becomes first inning bets. So we will have that.

0:02:59.320 --> 0:03:01.320
<v Speaker 1>But in the in the meantime, what we'll do is

0:03:01.639 --> 0:03:05.320
<v Speaker 1>we'll do money line money line splits, run line those

0:03:05.360 --> 0:03:08.960
<v Speaker 1>are all very widely available stats. Then we'll sort of

0:03:09.040 --> 0:03:12.000
<v Speaker 1>narrow it down and do different categories. Starting pitching, we'll

0:03:12.000 --> 0:03:14.200
<v Speaker 1>talk about umpires. Will bring in Mark Borcher, who has

0:03:14.240 --> 0:03:17.480
<v Speaker 1>historical umpire stats force primarily for totals betters, but also

0:03:17.520 --> 0:03:21.520
<v Speaker 1>for sides. Going to know which umpires tend to Uh,

0:03:21.560 --> 0:03:24.400
<v Speaker 1>I don't know. Let's say call balls and strikes in

0:03:24.440 --> 0:03:26.959
<v Speaker 1>their own unique kinds of ways. And I put together

0:03:27.000 --> 0:03:29.720
<v Speaker 1>these graphics. It's sure it tells you the stats, that's

0:03:29.760 --> 0:03:32.079
<v Speaker 1>for sure. Yeah. And then we'll do five inning stats

0:03:32.120 --> 0:03:34.320
<v Speaker 1>first five because people love betting first five. So we'll

0:03:34.320 --> 0:03:36.640
<v Speaker 1>talk about the teams that have formed the best first

0:03:36.720 --> 0:03:40.200
<v Speaker 1>fives and the worst. And then proprietary first inning stats

0:03:40.240 --> 0:03:43.320
<v Speaker 1>that you will not find anywhere else. We have them

0:03:43.320 --> 0:03:45.000
<v Speaker 1>here on a numbers game, and we'll talk about the

0:03:45.040 --> 0:03:49.280
<v Speaker 1>pictures that perform the best and the worst in first

0:03:49.280 --> 0:03:52.160
<v Speaker 1>innings to help inform your first inning bets. Now, here's

0:03:52.160 --> 0:03:55.000
<v Speaker 1>the caveat to all of this, and it should be stated,

0:03:55.000 --> 0:03:56.520
<v Speaker 1>and I'll stay it. I'll state it again at some

0:03:56.560 --> 0:03:59.200
<v Speaker 1>point during the show. Much of this is going to

0:03:59.320 --> 0:04:01.720
<v Speaker 1>just be narrative. The whole point of this show is

0:04:01.720 --> 0:04:05.440
<v Speaker 1>to give you predictive information. Some of it's gonna be narrative.

0:04:05.440 --> 0:04:07.440
<v Speaker 1>Someone's gonna be predictive. It's up to you, obviously, is

0:04:07.440 --> 0:04:10.480
<v Speaker 1>the better to determine which you feel is more predictive

0:04:10.560 --> 0:04:13.080
<v Speaker 1>than not. But a lot of it is just, oh, well,

0:04:13.160 --> 0:04:16.840
<v Speaker 1>this has happened. Is it sustainable? And that's sort of

0:04:17.000 --> 0:04:19.520
<v Speaker 1>the question that's the conundrum here. If it was that easy, right,

0:04:19.560 --> 0:04:22.800
<v Speaker 1>if we're just giving stats, was that easy projecting moving forward,

0:04:22.880 --> 0:04:25.640
<v Speaker 1>then everybody would be a rich person, Benny. But it's

0:04:25.680 --> 0:04:29.160
<v Speaker 1>always fascinating to look at and to determine what could

0:04:29.440 --> 0:04:33.120
<v Speaker 1>continue and what is just sort of a mirage that

0:04:33.279 --> 0:04:35.720
<v Speaker 1>has no ability to be sustained. Let us begin, sir,

0:04:36.200 --> 0:04:38.039
<v Speaker 1>by the way major League Baseball this weekend. We were

0:04:38.040 --> 0:04:39.480
<v Speaker 1>just talking with Mitch and Paul E. Moan wents Ago

0:04:39.920 --> 0:04:41.680
<v Speaker 1>and this is why it's fun to have Sporer on

0:04:41.720 --> 0:04:43.960
<v Speaker 1>the show today as well. But it has just been

0:04:44.120 --> 0:04:48.200
<v Speaker 1>unbelievable the things that have gone on in Major League Baseball,

0:04:48.240 --> 0:04:50.160
<v Speaker 1>specifically like you remember, have to go back for like

0:04:50.400 --> 0:04:53.400
<v Speaker 1>just yesterday, we're talking about how the Padres against the Pirates,

0:04:53.680 --> 0:04:55.880
<v Speaker 1>Padres first team in the last eight five seasons to

0:04:55.920 --> 0:05:00.520
<v Speaker 1>blow multiple three run leads after the eighth uh, they

0:05:00.520 --> 0:05:04.120
<v Speaker 1>were up seven to four over the Pirates. Pirates got

0:05:04.240 --> 0:05:06.640
<v Speaker 1>three to tip up to seven seven Padres put three

0:05:06.680 --> 0:05:09.239
<v Speaker 1>more up on the board. Pirates tied that eventually wanted

0:05:09.279 --> 0:05:13.359
<v Speaker 1>eleven to ten. Unbelievable. Then there's the Dodgers three straight

0:05:13.440 --> 0:05:16.039
<v Speaker 1>games where rookie hit a walk off home run. That's

0:05:16.080 --> 0:05:18.640
<v Speaker 1>never happened in the history of Major League Baseball. By

0:05:18.640 --> 0:05:21.480
<v Speaker 1>the way, the Rockies bullpen talked about the volatility of baseball.

0:05:21.839 --> 0:05:24.120
<v Speaker 1>Rockies bullpen eight and the third innings in their series

0:05:24.160 --> 0:05:27.799
<v Speaker 1>against the Dodgers gave up eight earned runs, four homers,

0:05:27.839 --> 0:05:31.640
<v Speaker 1>including those three walk offs. So predicting baseball on a

0:05:31.720 --> 0:05:33.480
<v Speaker 1>day to day base is hard enough. We'll try to

0:05:33.680 --> 0:05:35.960
<v Speaker 1>give some perspective on it with all the stats that

0:05:36.040 --> 0:05:38.479
<v Speaker 1>we go through today, beginning with let us start Kelly

0:05:38.960 --> 0:05:41.520
<v Speaker 1>with let's do the broadest one, which is money line

0:05:41.920 --> 0:05:44.719
<v Speaker 1>records for Major League Baseball teams, and these are widely available.

0:05:44.760 --> 0:05:49.120
<v Speaker 1>Covers dot com a great source to find money line uh,

0:05:49.640 --> 0:05:53.120
<v Speaker 1>sort of the exercises of Bizarro one. Let's say you

0:05:53.160 --> 0:05:55.120
<v Speaker 1>showed up the beginning of a Major League baseball season

0:05:55.160 --> 0:05:57.480
<v Speaker 1>and you decided to bet every each one of these

0:05:57.560 --> 0:06:01.320
<v Speaker 1>teams as a favorite laying the money to win a unit,

0:06:01.839 --> 0:06:04.640
<v Speaker 1>or as a dog laying the unit to win. Uh.

0:06:04.760 --> 0:06:07.320
<v Speaker 1>And if you perform that Bizarro exercise, here are the

0:06:07.440 --> 0:06:09.800
<v Speaker 1>teams that are hooking you up the best in terms

0:06:09.839 --> 0:06:12.600
<v Speaker 1>of in terms of the return on investment, it is

0:06:12.640 --> 0:06:15.800
<v Speaker 1>the Minnesota Twins. The Minnesota Twins here fifty and twenty

0:06:15.839 --> 0:06:18.800
<v Speaker 1>seven in your standings, they would have netted you eight

0:06:18.839 --> 0:06:21.680
<v Speaker 1>team point five units. Again the Bizarro exercise of having

0:06:21.760 --> 0:06:24.160
<v Speaker 1>bet them every single day thus far this year. The

0:06:24.279 --> 0:06:28.960
<v Speaker 1>reason they were often priced very very generously early in

0:06:29.000 --> 0:06:31.640
<v Speaker 1>the season before folks caught on, before the market caught

0:06:31.680 --> 0:06:34.839
<v Speaker 1>on to how good this baseball team actually is. Dodgers,

0:06:34.920 --> 0:06:39.080
<v Speaker 1>no surprise, second sixteen points six five units roughly in

0:06:39.160 --> 0:06:40.920
<v Speaker 1>your pockets of you bet them every day thus far

0:06:41.040 --> 0:06:43.240
<v Speaker 1>this season, and keep mine with the Dodgers their favorites

0:06:43.279 --> 0:06:46.560
<v Speaker 1>and sometimes big time favorites on given days. So for

0:06:46.760 --> 0:06:50.040
<v Speaker 1>them to have that kind of unit hall for you

0:06:50.480 --> 0:06:53.000
<v Speaker 1>just tells you how good of a baseball team this is.

0:06:53.040 --> 0:06:55.279
<v Speaker 1>And as I was mentioning with Mitch and Pauli moments

0:06:55.279 --> 0:06:58.279
<v Speaker 1>ago in our crossover, there fifty four and twenty five,

0:06:58.720 --> 0:07:01.840
<v Speaker 1>the Dodgers, we are getting into we're not quite in

0:07:01.880 --> 0:07:05.760
<v Speaker 1>Seattle Mariners two thousand, one sixteen game territory, but their

0:07:05.800 --> 0:07:08.440
<v Speaker 1>paces righted about one hundred and ten wins right now.

0:07:08.480 --> 0:07:11.840
<v Speaker 1>That's how good the Dodgers are. Rangers, if you had

0:07:11.920 --> 0:07:14.680
<v Speaker 1>this before the season started, good for you, Rangers number three,

0:07:15.320 --> 0:07:17.600
<v Speaker 1>number three team and sent in terms of who has

0:07:17.640 --> 0:07:20.280
<v Speaker 1>been best for better's fifteen points seven units in pockets

0:07:20.640 --> 0:07:23.960
<v Speaker 1>for bizarro Rangers betters, that is, Rangers betters who would

0:07:24.000 --> 0:07:26.280
<v Speaker 1>have bet the Rangers every single game thus far this season.

0:07:26.720 --> 0:07:28.560
<v Speaker 1>By the way, if you're betting the Rangers every game,

0:07:29.120 --> 0:07:31.480
<v Speaker 1>or any team any game over every single game, perhaps

0:07:31.480 --> 0:07:34.280
<v Speaker 1>you're doing something a little little nuts. Maybe that's not

0:07:34.320 --> 0:07:35.520
<v Speaker 1>how you want to bet things, but you get it

0:07:35.560 --> 0:07:38.440
<v Speaker 1>for the exercise's sake. Braves and White Sox close out

0:07:38.760 --> 0:07:40.960
<v Speaker 1>the top five in terms of the best money line

0:07:41.000 --> 0:07:43.680
<v Speaker 1>teams four betters in baseball thus far this year. And

0:07:43.720 --> 0:07:45.920
<v Speaker 1>again the White Sox, even though they're thirty six and

0:07:46.000 --> 0:07:51.080
<v Speaker 1>thirty nine, they are dogs so often and such generous

0:07:51.160 --> 0:07:52.560
<v Speaker 1>dogs if you will, a lot of bang for your

0:07:52.600 --> 0:07:54.920
<v Speaker 1>buck that even at thirty six and thirty nine they

0:07:54.920 --> 0:07:57.040
<v Speaker 1>would have netted you seven point eight five units. Thus,

0:07:57.080 --> 0:07:58.960
<v Speaker 1>far this year. By the way, the converse of that,

0:07:59.000 --> 0:08:01.360
<v Speaker 1>because we'll get to the splits momentarily, but the converse.

0:08:01.440 --> 0:08:03.720
<v Speaker 1>The worst R O I teams in all of baseball.

0:08:04.040 --> 0:08:07.800
<v Speaker 1>No surprises here your Baltimore Orioles. And when I say you're,

0:08:07.840 --> 0:08:10.320
<v Speaker 1>I mean mine grew up on the Orioles twenty two

0:08:10.360 --> 0:08:13.080
<v Speaker 1>and fifty six. They would have hemorrhaged you nineteen point

0:08:13.160 --> 0:08:15.920
<v Speaker 1>five five units roughly if you had bet the Orioles

0:08:15.920 --> 0:08:17.840
<v Speaker 1>every single day as far this year, and by the way,

0:08:17.840 --> 0:08:19.640
<v Speaker 1>if you've done that, you really are doing something wrong.

0:08:20.080 --> 0:08:24.480
<v Speaker 1>Royal Second fifteen point three units. Uh Down, Blue Jays

0:08:24.560 --> 0:08:30.280
<v Speaker 1>fourteen point seven five units. Blue Jays just offensively so Hamstrong, Nationals,

0:08:30.440 --> 0:08:33.760
<v Speaker 1>and Red Sox. Some couple of these teams, not like

0:08:33.840 --> 0:08:35.959
<v Speaker 1>the others, Nationals and Red Sox, would have cost you

0:08:36.040 --> 0:08:38.200
<v Speaker 1>the most money. And in the Red Sox case, it's

0:08:38.400 --> 0:08:40.400
<v Speaker 1>the fact that they are favorites and such big time

0:08:40.440 --> 0:08:43.120
<v Speaker 1>favorites so often that even at forty two and thirty seven,

0:08:43.120 --> 0:08:45.480
<v Speaker 1>they would have cost you the fifth most amount of

0:08:45.559 --> 0:08:48.280
<v Speaker 1>units in baseball thus far this season as we round

0:08:48.320 --> 0:08:51.080
<v Speaker 1>the halfway bend, just over fourteen units. If you had

0:08:51.120 --> 0:08:53.600
<v Speaker 1>bet the Red Sox blindly thus far this season, by

0:08:53.600 --> 0:08:56.240
<v Speaker 1>the way, in terms of home road splits, Kelly, this

0:08:56.400 --> 0:08:58.800
<v Speaker 1>is all this is often interesting to people. If you

0:08:58.920 --> 0:09:03.000
<v Speaker 1>look at home split the single two best teams in baseball,

0:09:03.160 --> 0:09:06.719
<v Speaker 1>just betting them at home, it's not even close. It's

0:09:06.760 --> 0:09:09.520
<v Speaker 1>the Dodgers and the Rangers. The Dodgers and the Rangers

0:09:09.559 --> 0:09:12.079
<v Speaker 1>who are second and third overall when it comes to

0:09:12.280 --> 0:09:17.480
<v Speaker 1>home performance. They are leaps and bounds, not just leaps, Kelley,

0:09:17.760 --> 0:09:20.319
<v Speaker 1>leaps and bounds better than any other team at home.

0:09:20.600 --> 0:09:25.520
<v Speaker 1>The Dodgers eighteen point five units to the positive at home,

0:09:25.720 --> 0:09:28.640
<v Speaker 1>the Rangers eighteen point one units to the positive. If

0:09:28.679 --> 0:09:30.599
<v Speaker 1>you had bet them every single time thus far this

0:09:30.679 --> 0:09:33.120
<v Speaker 1>season at home. Now, if you were paying attention moments

0:09:33.120 --> 0:09:36.920
<v Speaker 1>ago and actually mentioned that their overall numbers were slightly

0:09:37.040 --> 0:09:41.440
<v Speaker 1>below their home numbers, so yes, this is the case,

0:09:41.559 --> 0:09:43.800
<v Speaker 1>then that if the Dodgers and Rangers are eighteen point

0:09:43.840 --> 0:09:47.000
<v Speaker 1>five and eighteen point one units respectively, as blind bedders

0:09:47.000 --> 0:09:50.360
<v Speaker 1>would have them at home, they are slightly in the negative.

0:09:50.400 --> 0:09:52.720
<v Speaker 1>Both of those teams on the road, by the way,

0:09:52.760 --> 0:09:57.080
<v Speaker 1>the Dodgers and Rangers represent in terms of home road splits. Therefore,

0:09:57.559 --> 0:10:01.280
<v Speaker 1>the widest gap of any teams in baseball in terms

0:10:01.320 --> 0:10:03.040
<v Speaker 1>of home road splits. By the way, the team that

0:10:03.120 --> 0:10:05.520
<v Speaker 1>came in third that might be of interest to some

0:10:05.600 --> 0:10:10.160
<v Speaker 1>folks is of all teams, the Arizona Diamondbacks, who was roughly, yeah,

0:10:10.360 --> 0:10:13.000
<v Speaker 1>roughly of cost you nine point nine units at home,

0:10:14.120 --> 0:10:16.760
<v Speaker 1>but would have you up nine point nine units on

0:10:16.920 --> 0:10:20.640
<v Speaker 1>the road. So the Diamondbacks, who are middle about twelve

0:10:20.920 --> 0:10:25.280
<v Speaker 1>overall money line, they're middling. They like the Dodgers and Rangers,

0:10:25.320 --> 0:10:27.959
<v Speaker 1>have huge home road splits. It's just that the Diamondbacks

0:10:28.000 --> 0:10:32.720
<v Speaker 1>splits are reverse splits. And doesn't everybody know in Phoenix,

0:10:32.960 --> 0:10:34.800
<v Speaker 1>in the Greater Phoenix area, they're sort of nodding their

0:10:34.840 --> 0:10:38.640
<v Speaker 1>heads like, yeah, not a great home experience that it

0:10:38.720 --> 0:10:41.000
<v Speaker 1>has not been for the diamond Backs thus far this year.

0:10:41.440 --> 0:10:43.680
<v Speaker 1>Um so those are the widest gaps between home road splits.

0:10:43.679 --> 0:10:46.440
<v Speaker 1>By the way, if you're wondering who's the worst at home, uh,

0:10:46.520 --> 0:10:49.439
<v Speaker 1>no surprise. The worst team at home would be the

0:10:49.480 --> 0:10:53.600
<v Speaker 1>Baltimore Orioles. Seventeen of their nineteen point five overall units

0:10:53.679 --> 0:10:57.920
<v Speaker 1>lost have been at home at Camden Yards. Not good,

0:10:58.200 --> 0:11:00.400
<v Speaker 1>not good at all for the Orioles, who of us

0:11:00.440 --> 0:11:02.760
<v Speaker 1>who are down seventeen units in terms of home games,

0:11:03.000 --> 0:11:05.240
<v Speaker 1>by the way. Second worst at home the Boston Red

0:11:05.280 --> 0:11:10.240
<v Speaker 1>Sox at Fenway fourteen point five units down at Fenway

0:11:10.320 --> 0:11:14.760
<v Speaker 1>Park in terms of their home performance road performance, again

0:11:14.840 --> 0:11:18.880
<v Speaker 1>we're talking money line Minnesota Twins, who are number one overall.

0:11:19.400 --> 0:11:21.840
<v Speaker 1>Most of their units have been gained on the road.

0:11:22.320 --> 0:11:25.840
<v Speaker 1>Of their eighteen point five units gained overall, twelve point

0:11:25.920 --> 0:11:27.680
<v Speaker 1>three of those have been on the road. There twenty

0:11:27.760 --> 0:11:29.920
<v Speaker 1>six and fourteen on the road this year again for

0:11:30.360 --> 0:11:32.600
<v Speaker 1>for twelve point three good for twelve point three units

0:11:32.800 --> 0:11:35.480
<v Speaker 1>for Bizarro Bettors in terms of their road performance. That

0:11:35.679 --> 0:11:38.480
<v Speaker 1>is by far the best actually know by far. But

0:11:38.679 --> 0:11:41.280
<v Speaker 1>number two of all teams in baseball was the aforementioned

0:11:41.320 --> 0:11:45.040
<v Speaker 1>Arizona Diamondbacks, who had that wide split wide split rather

0:11:45.120 --> 0:11:48.200
<v Speaker 1>between home and road. Diamondbacks up nine point five years,

0:11:48.360 --> 0:11:51.120
<v Speaker 1>nine point nine five units. Excuse me, onto the road,

0:11:51.160 --> 0:11:52.800
<v Speaker 1>by the way, and he guesses who the third best

0:11:52.920 --> 0:11:55.640
<v Speaker 1>road team is on the money Line, Kelly, Oh god,

0:11:56.440 --> 0:11:59.640
<v Speaker 1>you have mentioned them already on this show. I've met

0:11:59.679 --> 0:12:01.920
<v Speaker 1>you to the Marlins there, I was gonna say, I

0:12:02.080 --> 0:12:06.000
<v Speaker 1>think I really mentioned one teams. So the Marlins nine

0:12:06.080 --> 0:12:08.240
<v Speaker 1>point four or five units for betters on the road.

0:12:08.520 --> 0:12:11.400
<v Speaker 1>How about that pretty incredible? You know, the two things

0:12:11.480 --> 0:12:13.600
<v Speaker 1>that that I take away when we look at these

0:12:13.760 --> 0:12:16.520
<v Speaker 1>r o I numbers both like just overall and hope

0:12:16.520 --> 0:12:18.440
<v Speaker 1>and away you know you mentioned it a little bit

0:12:18.480 --> 0:12:20.959
<v Speaker 1>of both. But as far as the best r OY teams,

0:12:21.400 --> 0:12:25.520
<v Speaker 1>you know, the Rangers to be forty two and thirty

0:12:25.559 --> 0:12:28.800
<v Speaker 1>six and to be that strong at home is impressive.

0:12:28.880 --> 0:12:32.240
<v Speaker 1>And that maybe even weirder is the Dodgers, who are

0:12:32.280 --> 0:12:35.920
<v Speaker 1>so good losing you buddy when they go on the road. Uh.

0:12:36.120 --> 0:12:37.640
<v Speaker 1>You know that when we look at the bottom r

0:12:37.640 --> 0:12:41.120
<v Speaker 1>o Y teams, Uh, you know, like you you mentioned before,

0:12:41.200 --> 0:12:43.439
<v Speaker 1>you the Red Sox being heavily favorite, maybe not a

0:12:43.520 --> 0:12:46.480
<v Speaker 1>shocker to see them there, But the Orioles are that

0:12:46.679 --> 0:12:48.959
<v Speaker 1>bad because they've been that bad from the beginning of

0:12:49.000 --> 0:12:51.600
<v Speaker 1>the season. So it's almost tough to end up at

0:12:51.640 --> 0:12:54.200
<v Speaker 1>the top of that list when you're getting plus two

0:12:54.240 --> 0:12:56.680
<v Speaker 1>one are plus two fifty every day? And again for better?

0:12:56.760 --> 0:12:58.800
<v Speaker 1>Is the question once again is okay, all this is

0:12:58.840 --> 0:13:01.079
<v Speaker 1>fun and interesting to look at. How much of this

0:13:01.280 --> 0:13:04.280
<v Speaker 1>is predictive moving forward? Can the Rangers still be that

0:13:04.400 --> 0:13:06.959
<v Speaker 1>good at home? Uh? Can the Dodgers still be that

0:13:07.200 --> 0:13:10.120
<v Speaker 1>middling on the road. As Kelly just pointed out, by

0:13:10.160 --> 0:13:13.440
<v Speaker 1>the way, the worst road teams in terms of the splits,

0:13:13.440 --> 0:13:15.760
<v Speaker 1>because we didn't get to those yet, the worst road

0:13:15.840 --> 0:13:17.920
<v Speaker 1>team in all of baseball in terms of money line

0:13:17.920 --> 0:13:23.559
<v Speaker 1>split would be and he guesses, Kelly, I gave you.

0:13:23.600 --> 0:13:25.400
<v Speaker 1>If you give, if I gave you five guesses, you

0:13:25.480 --> 0:13:26.559
<v Speaker 1>might not come up with us. And maybe I'll just

0:13:26.600 --> 0:13:29.720
<v Speaker 1>tell you it's the Mets. Mets are down ten point

0:13:29.800 --> 0:13:32.679
<v Speaker 1>eight units on the road, closely followed by the Kansas

0:13:32.720 --> 0:13:35.160
<v Speaker 1>City Royals who are down nine point three five units

0:13:35.200 --> 0:13:37.640
<v Speaker 1>on the road. So nothing really to see there. I'm

0:13:37.679 --> 0:13:39.839
<v Speaker 1>not not so sure there's anything to read into that

0:13:39.920 --> 0:13:42.839
<v Speaker 1>in terms of run line. Now, this, of course is

0:13:43.440 --> 0:13:46.439
<v Speaker 1>what I like to call a sort of power um

0:13:46.920 --> 0:13:50.480
<v Speaker 1>number for betting teams, because on the run line, again,

0:13:50.520 --> 0:13:52.280
<v Speaker 1>if you're winning as a favorite, winning by more than

0:13:52.320 --> 0:13:54.120
<v Speaker 1>a run and a half, and if you're losing, if

0:13:54.160 --> 0:13:56.760
<v Speaker 1>you're good, sometimes you get within that run and a

0:13:56.800 --> 0:13:58.480
<v Speaker 1>half and you lose by just one run. So this

0:13:58.559 --> 0:14:01.480
<v Speaker 1>will correlate a lot with one run records. But in

0:14:01.640 --> 0:14:04.560
<v Speaker 1>terms of who's the best run line team in baseball

0:14:04.880 --> 0:14:07.640
<v Speaker 1>this year? So again, Bizarro exercise you're betting this team

0:14:07.800 --> 0:14:09.760
<v Speaker 1>on the run line, whether as a favorite or as

0:14:09.800 --> 0:14:12.440
<v Speaker 1>a dog, each and every single game thus far this year.

0:14:12.800 --> 0:14:16.199
<v Speaker 1>The number one run line team UH in terms of

0:14:16.559 --> 0:14:20.560
<v Speaker 1>record and in terms of your cash the Rangers, the

0:14:20.640 --> 0:14:23.880
<v Speaker 1>aforementioned Texas Rangers, who are forty seven and thirty one

0:14:23.960 --> 0:14:25.880
<v Speaker 1>on the run line thus far this year, good for

0:14:26.120 --> 0:14:30.520
<v Speaker 1>fifteen point one units. So remember, the Rangers are fifteen

0:14:30.600 --> 0:14:32.880
<v Speaker 1>points seven units up on the money line if you

0:14:33.000 --> 0:14:34.560
<v Speaker 1>bet them every time this year, if you've bet them

0:14:34.600 --> 0:14:37.600
<v Speaker 1>on the run line, you'd be up fifteen point one units.

0:14:37.960 --> 0:14:40.240
<v Speaker 1>Rangers thus far this year first half of the season,

0:14:40.600 --> 0:14:42.960
<v Speaker 1>just a few games shy of that. For them specifically,

0:14:43.440 --> 0:14:49.120
<v Speaker 1>they are a better's dream. Diamondbacks have the second best record,

0:14:49.360 --> 0:14:51.000
<v Speaker 1>as is shown on the screen here. But let me

0:14:51.040 --> 0:14:53.480
<v Speaker 1>give you in terms of the money haull second best

0:14:53.560 --> 0:14:55.440
<v Speaker 1>team in terms of money in your pocket on the

0:14:55.520 --> 0:14:57.880
<v Speaker 1>run line, it's actually the New York Yankees, which fall

0:14:58.000 --> 0:15:00.240
<v Speaker 1>fourth on the screen right there. They would have up

0:15:00.280 --> 0:15:02.840
<v Speaker 1>twelve point four five units. What are the Rangers and

0:15:02.880 --> 0:15:05.760
<v Speaker 1>the Yankees have in common. A whole bunch of offense.

0:15:05.960 --> 0:15:07.960
<v Speaker 1>A whole bunch of offense that even when they're pitching

0:15:08.040 --> 0:15:12.480
<v Speaker 1>is middling, they will hit you into oblivion. And so

0:15:12.640 --> 0:15:15.080
<v Speaker 1>the Yankees number two to the Rangers in terms of

0:15:15.120 --> 0:15:17.360
<v Speaker 1>the best teams on the run line, sort of a

0:15:17.440 --> 0:15:19.520
<v Speaker 1>de facto power ranking, if you will. In terms of

0:15:19.560 --> 0:15:23.480
<v Speaker 1>the worst, well worst than the record actually not worstan

0:15:23.520 --> 0:15:25.720
<v Speaker 1>a record. The Orioles of this are the worst record,

0:15:26.000 --> 0:15:28.800
<v Speaker 1>but they're the second worst in terms of money lost

0:15:28.880 --> 0:15:30.800
<v Speaker 1>on the run line. They would have cost you fifteen

0:15:30.840 --> 0:15:33.320
<v Speaker 1>point six five units. By the way, third worst on

0:15:33.400 --> 0:15:35.360
<v Speaker 1>the run line would be the Toronto Blue Jays also

0:15:35.400 --> 0:15:37.840
<v Speaker 1>pictured there. They would have cost you fourteen point nine

0:15:37.960 --> 0:15:41.080
<v Speaker 1>units on run lines this year Red Sox also pictured

0:15:41.320 --> 0:15:44.040
<v Speaker 1>fourth worst, fourteen point five five. But you know who

0:15:44.040 --> 0:15:46.320
<v Speaker 1>would actually have cost you the most money on the

0:15:46.440 --> 0:15:49.680
<v Speaker 1>run line, not pictured in the worst five records, which

0:15:49.760 --> 0:15:52.240
<v Speaker 1>gives you an idea of how a mnemic their offense is.

0:15:52.920 --> 0:15:56.880
<v Speaker 1>It is the San Francisco Giants. San Francisco Giants thirty

0:15:57.040 --> 0:15:59.520
<v Speaker 1>six and forty on the run line, but they'd have

0:15:59.600 --> 0:16:04.280
<v Speaker 1>cost you sixteen point nine five units in terms of money, uh,

0:16:04.480 --> 0:16:06.640
<v Speaker 1>in terms of run line bets. So that has a

0:16:06.720 --> 0:16:09.160
<v Speaker 1>lot to do with the fact that the Giants aren't

0:16:09.160 --> 0:16:12.480
<v Speaker 1>gonna hit very well. Um and the fact that sometimes

0:16:12.640 --> 0:16:18.040
<v Speaker 1>their market price is just not uh commensurate, if you will,

0:16:18.480 --> 0:16:21.840
<v Speaker 1>with what the results have been. So all very interesting

0:16:21.920 --> 0:16:24.840
<v Speaker 1>in terms of the numbers. Now again, what of this

0:16:25.040 --> 0:16:27.960
<v Speaker 1>is predicted. Can the Rangers keep this going? I don't know.

0:16:28.120 --> 0:16:30.920
<v Speaker 1>With that hitting, maybe they can, Maybe they can't. With

0:16:31.000 --> 0:16:34.320
<v Speaker 1>that ballpark, specifically at home, maybe they can. So remember

0:16:34.400 --> 0:16:37.240
<v Speaker 1>that's the thing with the Rangers. Really really good money line,

0:16:37.280 --> 0:16:40.080
<v Speaker 1>really really good run line, and really good specifically in

0:16:40.280 --> 0:16:44.560
<v Speaker 1>terms of the money line at home Texas Rangers. Very interesting.

0:16:44.640 --> 0:16:47.760
<v Speaker 1>Will come back, We'll do starting pitchers, and we'll do umpires.

0:16:47.800 --> 0:16:51.760
<v Speaker 1>We'll bringing Mark Borchered talk about his historical umpire records

0:16:51.800 --> 0:16:55.560
<v Speaker 1>to sort of draw conclusions on whether this one half

0:16:55.680 --> 0:16:59.920
<v Speaker 1>season performance really has legs in terms of the umpires

0:17:00.080 --> 0:17:02.720
<v Speaker 1>career performances over time. Then we'll bring in Pulsemore We'll

0:17:02.760 --> 0:17:05.320
<v Speaker 1>talk to him about Major League Baseball beyond betting. Jason

0:17:05.359 --> 0:17:07.639
<v Speaker 1>Weinart with first inning Picks, will do it all on

0:17:07.720 --> 0:17:09.840
<v Speaker 1>the mlb Q two derivative show right here on a

0:17:09.920 --> 0:17:12.640
<v Speaker 1>Numbers Game at Visa Down Back to a Numbers Game

0:17:12.680 --> 0:17:15.960
<v Speaker 1>with your host Gil Alexander, broadcasting live from our Visa

0:17:16.000 --> 0:17:18.760
<v Speaker 1>in studios in Las Vegas back on the numbers game

0:17:18.880 --> 0:17:22.639
<v Speaker 1>here at visa United States Women's World Cup team on

0:17:22.760 --> 0:17:24.720
<v Speaker 1>the field. By the way, Chris Feleik of the Bear

0:17:24.720 --> 0:17:27.000
<v Speaker 1>from mespn's College Game Day chiming in on those stats

0:17:27.040 --> 0:17:29.240
<v Speaker 1>that we just went over, and I think correctly so Kelly,

0:17:29.320 --> 0:17:31.600
<v Speaker 1>you were alluding to this as well, uh, saying that's

0:17:31.600 --> 0:17:33.440
<v Speaker 1>a little surprising the worst teams and units of the

0:17:33.480 --> 0:17:36.119
<v Speaker 1>Orioles and Jays, just because there's such huge dogs all

0:17:36.160 --> 0:17:39.080
<v Speaker 1>the time that a win usually negates a couple of losses,

0:17:39.119 --> 0:17:41.439
<v Speaker 1>which is exactly right, But yet they're so bad at

0:17:41.480 --> 0:17:45.439
<v Speaker 1>baseball Oriels in particular Blue Jay's offense and by the way,

0:17:45.480 --> 0:17:48.720
<v Speaker 1>Blue Jays on base percentage flirting with some of the

0:17:48.800 --> 0:17:52.240
<v Speaker 1>worst on base percentages of all time. Uh. And it's

0:17:52.280 --> 0:17:55.600
<v Speaker 1>tough way betting experience. I talk sometimes about this. Imagine

0:17:56.480 --> 0:17:58.359
<v Speaker 1>if you step back a second and you think about

0:17:58.400 --> 0:18:00.359
<v Speaker 1>this stuff, and you're like, all right, well, what is

0:18:00.400 --> 0:18:03.600
<v Speaker 1>the experience like betting on a team like the Blue Jays,

0:18:03.640 --> 0:18:07.159
<v Speaker 1>like backing that offense and just the misery of just

0:18:07.520 --> 0:18:11.520
<v Speaker 1>not cashing in, um, not getting even ducks on the

0:18:11.600 --> 0:18:13.480
<v Speaker 1>pond if you will to have a chance to score

0:18:13.560 --> 0:18:16.879
<v Speaker 1>runs it's just so it's such a tough betting experience

0:18:16.920 --> 0:18:19.359
<v Speaker 1>here in the dog days of summer. Let's continue because

0:18:19.640 --> 0:18:21.680
<v Speaker 1>we want to do starting pitchers here real quick, and

0:18:21.720 --> 0:18:25.560
<v Speaker 1>we'll get to umpires umpires of of note for totals betters,

0:18:25.560 --> 0:18:28.200
<v Speaker 1>also side betters, but particularly totals betters. Let's see the

0:18:28.240 --> 0:18:32.560
<v Speaker 1>starting pitchers real quick here, Kelly, Lucas Giolito. In terms

0:18:32.600 --> 0:18:35.200
<v Speaker 1>of the Bizarro exercise, if you had bet every single

0:18:35.320 --> 0:18:38.280
<v Speaker 1>Lucas Giolito start thus far this year, and what a

0:18:38.480 --> 0:18:41.600
<v Speaker 1>far cry, what a difference a year makes, because last year,

0:18:41.640 --> 0:18:43.240
<v Speaker 1>every time Gelto was on the hill, I say this

0:18:43.320 --> 0:18:46.720
<v Speaker 1>all the time, I would list his stats and they were,

0:18:47.080 --> 0:18:49.919
<v Speaker 1>if not the worst in all of baseball per fan Graphs,

0:18:50.320 --> 0:18:52.200
<v Speaker 1>they were right in the top two worst, and I

0:18:52.240 --> 0:18:55.520
<v Speaker 1>would have to apologize to the Giolito family for reciting

0:18:55.560 --> 0:18:58.800
<v Speaker 1>them every day. We'll look at that. Lucas Giolito is

0:18:58.880 --> 0:19:03.560
<v Speaker 1>the single best pitcher starting pitcher for betters thus far

0:19:03.680 --> 0:19:07.440
<v Speaker 1>this year. The White Sox eleven and three in Gelto starts,

0:19:07.520 --> 0:19:10.280
<v Speaker 1>you'd be up ten point five five units just having

0:19:10.720 --> 0:19:13.239
<v Speaker 1>bet Gelto starts blindly, by the way we faded him

0:19:13.320 --> 0:19:16.040
<v Speaker 1>last time. If you recall on the show Brandon Woodroff

0:19:16.119 --> 0:19:19.000
<v Speaker 1>of the Milwaukee Brewers. Brewers are thirteen and three in

0:19:19.080 --> 0:19:22.040
<v Speaker 1>his starts, he would have netted you nine point one units. Again,

0:19:22.160 --> 0:19:25.880
<v Speaker 1>these courtesy of covers. These are widely available. Andrew Kashner

0:19:25.920 --> 0:19:28.640
<v Speaker 1>of the Orioles, we're just talking about the Orioles. Well,

0:19:28.800 --> 0:19:31.720
<v Speaker 1>if you're an Orioles pitcher and the Orioles happened to

0:19:31.760 --> 0:19:34.160
<v Speaker 1>go nine and six when you're on the hill, that's

0:19:34.200 --> 0:19:36.320
<v Speaker 1>just what Chris was talking about, you'd be up eight

0:19:36.400 --> 0:19:39.520
<v Speaker 1>point nine units. That's how easy it is for you

0:19:39.680 --> 0:19:43.480
<v Speaker 1>to accumulate units if in fact the Orioles performed for you.

0:19:43.520 --> 0:19:45.560
<v Speaker 1>And Andrew Kashner has had a lot of run sport

0:19:45.880 --> 0:19:47.800
<v Speaker 1>on the hill for the Orioles. Eight point nine units

0:19:47.840 --> 0:19:50.680
<v Speaker 1>and Kashner starts. We talk about what is sustainable and

0:19:50.720 --> 0:19:53.359
<v Speaker 1>what is unsustainable. Let me just throw that into the

0:19:53.440 --> 0:19:56.520
<v Speaker 1>unsustainable category. Is pretty crazy to think about, where when

0:19:56.560 --> 0:19:58.560
<v Speaker 1>you're looking at everybody else we have on this graphic,

0:19:58.640 --> 0:20:01.600
<v Speaker 1>Cleland Ker shot with all of it. Did one castor

0:20:01.760 --> 0:20:03.800
<v Speaker 1>die did six? And he's made you more buddy. Yeah,

0:20:03.920 --> 0:20:06.280
<v Speaker 1>And simply because of that odds one of the one

0:20:06.320 --> 0:20:07.959
<v Speaker 1>of these things is not like the other. That's right,

0:20:08.040 --> 0:20:10.480
<v Speaker 1>Clayton Kershaw, Jake Odo Rezi closing out the top five

0:20:10.800 --> 0:20:13.680
<v Speaker 1>Kershaw Dodgers eleven and one in his starts. Remember he

0:20:13.720 --> 0:20:15.879
<v Speaker 1>had that long streak where you didn't have any losses

0:20:16.760 --> 0:20:19.280
<v Speaker 1>or no Dodgers games resulted in losses with him on

0:20:19.320 --> 0:20:21.240
<v Speaker 1>the hill, eleven and one, eight point six units to

0:20:21.280 --> 0:20:24.080
<v Speaker 1>the positive for you on Kershaw betting him blindly. Odor

0:20:24.160 --> 0:20:27.920
<v Speaker 1>Reesy for the Twinkies twins are eleven and four, and

0:20:28.000 --> 0:20:30.600
<v Speaker 1>Odo Reese starts, you'd be up seven point six units

0:20:30.720 --> 0:20:33.159
<v Speaker 1>roughly in his starts. By the way, the worst the

0:20:33.600 --> 0:20:36.280
<v Speaker 1>worst r O I pitchers in all of baseball. Uh,

0:20:36.800 --> 0:20:40.080
<v Speaker 1>David Hess of the of the Orioles, this is more

0:20:40.200 --> 0:20:42.600
<v Speaker 1>oriole esque. You know there was a thing called the

0:20:42.640 --> 0:20:45.720
<v Speaker 1>Oriole way when I was a kid. Uh. He's fifth worst.

0:20:45.800 --> 0:20:47.359
<v Speaker 1>By the way. The Orioles are two and eleven. In

0:20:47.440 --> 0:20:50.000
<v Speaker 1>his starts, you'd be down seven point eight units. Um.

0:20:50.600 --> 0:20:55.120
<v Speaker 1>Jorge Lopez one in nine, Jorge Lopez one in nine

0:20:55.600 --> 0:21:00.560
<v Speaker 1>in terms of starts for the Kansas City Royals thus

0:21:00.600 --> 0:21:02.520
<v Speaker 1>far this year, you'd be down eight point two units.

0:21:02.920 --> 0:21:05.240
<v Speaker 1>Scherzer is third worst, and this again has everything to

0:21:05.280 --> 0:21:07.200
<v Speaker 1>do with how big of a favorite he is every

0:21:07.280 --> 0:21:10.400
<v Speaker 1>time National's only six and ten with him on the hill,

0:21:10.600 --> 0:21:13.160
<v Speaker 1>so you'd be down ten point nine units. Jacob Degram

0:21:13.400 --> 0:21:16.320
<v Speaker 1>second worst, you'd be down twelve point to five units,

0:21:16.359 --> 0:21:18.080
<v Speaker 1>and to Gram starts because the Mets are only five

0:21:18.160 --> 0:21:20.560
<v Speaker 1>and eleven in his starts. And then no surprise again

0:21:20.720 --> 0:21:23.080
<v Speaker 1>like with Serzer, Chris Sale is going to be such

0:21:23.119 --> 0:21:25.640
<v Speaker 1>a prohibitive favorite in so many games, sometimes over three

0:21:25.680 --> 0:21:28.440
<v Speaker 1>dollar favorites that when he loses, man does its sting

0:21:29.480 --> 0:21:33.400
<v Speaker 1>red SOX six and ten in his starts. I'm surprised

0:21:33.400 --> 0:21:35.800
<v Speaker 1>you'd only be down twelve point six five units. Quite

0:21:35.840 --> 0:21:38.960
<v Speaker 1>frankly in sest we saw you know saw before we

0:21:39.040 --> 0:21:42.879
<v Speaker 1>were going over the t borrow I graph ry stuff. Yeah. Absolutely,

0:21:43.400 --> 0:21:45.800
<v Speaker 1>Let's bring in Mark Borcher to talk umpires. Mark from

0:21:45.880 --> 0:21:50.240
<v Speaker 1>Clear Data Sports. Good morning to you, sir, Good morning Gale. Mark.

0:21:50.320 --> 0:21:52.359
<v Speaker 1>You're back on the show, just like a hand in

0:21:52.400 --> 0:21:54.800
<v Speaker 1>the glove. Appreciate you doing this, man, I'll sure notice.

0:21:55.000 --> 0:21:56.520
<v Speaker 1>No I tell you what it was worth it to

0:21:56.600 --> 0:22:00.800
<v Speaker 1>hear you say a SPAN's I love about you the

0:22:00.880 --> 0:22:03.320
<v Speaker 1>voice of sports betting. You know that. Thank you, Mark,

0:22:03.320 --> 0:22:04.880
<v Speaker 1>I appreciate it. By the way, Mark. Before we get

0:22:04.880 --> 0:22:07.240
<v Speaker 1>into the umpires real quick, what is Clear Data Sports doing.

0:22:07.280 --> 0:22:11.600
<v Speaker 1>You're you're emerging. What's happening? Oh, it's it's wonderful gilt

0:22:11.600 --> 0:22:13.720
<v Speaker 1>we are emerging with Let me just say they're they're

0:22:13.760 --> 0:22:17.160
<v Speaker 1>smarter people than myself and it's going to allow us

0:22:17.200 --> 0:22:20.800
<v Speaker 1>as a handicapping team to produce this wonderful sports betting

0:22:20.880 --> 0:22:23.480
<v Speaker 1>tools and applications. I'm really excited about it because there's

0:22:23.480 --> 0:22:25.520
<v Speaker 1>a lot of stuff that's that's a lot of time

0:22:25.560 --> 0:22:27.480
<v Speaker 1>that I'm gonna be able to save myself first off,

0:22:27.560 --> 0:22:30.320
<v Speaker 1>and then the people that follow us secondly gonna be

0:22:30.320 --> 0:22:31.879
<v Speaker 1>able to interact with a lot of our data. So

0:22:32.119 --> 0:22:34.560
<v Speaker 1>very excited about it. You okay, well, congratulations to you

0:22:34.680 --> 0:22:37.000
<v Speaker 1>on that. We bring you in real quick for good

0:22:37.040 --> 0:22:38.639
<v Speaker 1>five minutes with Mark Portra because we want to talk

0:22:38.640 --> 0:22:42.000
<v Speaker 1>about umpires and I wanna say what their performance has

0:22:42.040 --> 0:22:43.880
<v Speaker 1>been in terms of over unders thus far this year,

0:22:44.119 --> 0:22:46.440
<v Speaker 1>and you can tell us if there's anything to it historically.

0:22:46.680 --> 0:22:50.000
<v Speaker 1>So let's talk about the most reliable over umpires thus

0:22:50.080 --> 0:22:53.640
<v Speaker 1>far this year. Alan Porter at the top of that list.

0:22:53.720 --> 0:22:56.359
<v Speaker 1>Alan Porter, again, you've got to check your umpire assignments.

0:22:56.680 --> 0:22:59.800
<v Speaker 1>You can find umpire assignments at sites at sites rather

0:23:00.080 --> 0:23:04.800
<v Speaker 1>like stat cast, Alan Porter when he's behind home plate

0:23:04.880 --> 0:23:07.440
<v Speaker 1>calling balls and strikes, thus far this year, games have

0:23:07.560 --> 0:23:10.840
<v Speaker 1>gone over twelve out of fourteen times, twelve out of

0:23:10.880 --> 0:23:12.920
<v Speaker 1>fourteen times eighty five point seven percent at the time

0:23:13.119 --> 0:23:15.560
<v Speaker 1>when he's been behind home plate. UH. Tom would ring

0:23:15.640 --> 0:23:17.400
<v Speaker 1>not as much of a sample size, only four out

0:23:17.440 --> 0:23:19.800
<v Speaker 1>of five have gone over. But then there's Mike Winners,

0:23:19.840 --> 0:23:22.600
<v Speaker 1>ten out of thirteen have gone over when he's called

0:23:22.640 --> 0:23:25.480
<v Speaker 1>balls and strikes. Jeffrey Kellogg nine out of twelve have

0:23:25.600 --> 0:23:30.080
<v Speaker 1>gone over. UM, And let's add to this list that's

0:23:30.280 --> 0:23:34.120
<v Speaker 1>that's shown both Carlos Torres and Chad Whitson ten at

0:23:34.160 --> 0:23:37.959
<v Speaker 1>of fourteen have gone over the total games that they

0:23:38.080 --> 0:23:41.719
<v Speaker 1>have umped behind home plate. Sean Barber, Marvin Hudson ten

0:23:41.760 --> 0:23:44.600
<v Speaker 1>out of fifteen, Trip Gibson the third, nine out of thirteen.

0:23:45.000 --> 0:23:48.440
<v Speaker 1>So a whole bunch in terms of reliably over thus

0:23:48.480 --> 0:23:50.520
<v Speaker 1>far this year. But any of those names, do you

0:23:50.600 --> 0:23:52.639
<v Speaker 1>have any historical numbers on any of those guys that

0:23:52.760 --> 0:23:54.440
<v Speaker 1>lead us to believe that this is not just some

0:23:54.880 --> 0:23:59.760
<v Speaker 1>aberration with them? Mark Yes, I do UM. Jeff kell

0:24:00.359 --> 0:24:04.200
<v Speaker 1>is number five and over. UH he's got, he's over

0:24:04.600 --> 0:24:07.080
<v Speaker 1>his quick year, which is a drive. The r A

0:24:07.160 --> 0:24:11.480
<v Speaker 1>based on strikeout percentage, walk percentage and groundball percentage is

0:24:11.600 --> 0:24:17.000
<v Speaker 1>six greater than the average umpire. So just to just

0:24:17.119 --> 0:24:20.120
<v Speaker 1>to kind of put it into context, there's ninety umpires

0:24:20.200 --> 0:24:23.280
<v Speaker 1>that have a decent sample size, and so so Kellogg

0:24:23.320 --> 0:24:26.560
<v Speaker 1>would be six uh from a from a run suppression

0:24:26.560 --> 0:24:30.040
<v Speaker 1>standpoint and the fifth and from a run explosion standpoint,

0:24:30.080 --> 0:24:32.240
<v Speaker 1>I guess to put it. So, so he is a

0:24:32.359 --> 0:24:35.959
<v Speaker 1>reliably over umpires. What you're saying beyond just this season

0:24:37.240 --> 0:24:41.600
<v Speaker 1>exactly deal And this is a four year sample size

0:24:41.720 --> 0:24:44.720
<v Speaker 1>and it's weighted towards the most recent year. That the

0:24:44.800 --> 0:24:47.280
<v Speaker 1>technical part of the other rating very interesting. And with

0:24:47.359 --> 0:24:49.159
<v Speaker 1>these guys, you never know, like is it you know,

0:24:49.480 --> 0:24:51.480
<v Speaker 1>the fact that their strike zone is the is the

0:24:51.560 --> 0:24:53.720
<v Speaker 1>size of a thimble. You know, like their strike zone

0:24:53.760 --> 0:24:56.640
<v Speaker 1>is so small that it's just that much more difficult

0:24:56.720 --> 0:25:01.400
<v Speaker 1>for pictures to get strikes and put themselves in favorable

0:25:01.480 --> 0:25:04.040
<v Speaker 1>counts in favorable positions during a baseball game, that much

0:25:04.080 --> 0:25:08.159
<v Speaker 1>more advantageous four hitters. So Jeffrey Kellogg the name that

0:25:08.280 --> 0:25:10.119
<v Speaker 1>leaps off the board, not just in terms of this

0:25:10.280 --> 0:25:13.440
<v Speaker 1>year's reliable over humps, but it extends to Mark's four

0:25:13.520 --> 0:25:17.680
<v Speaker 1>year sample size as well. What about the reverse here? Mark,

0:25:17.760 --> 0:25:21.159
<v Speaker 1>In terms of the biggest under umpires thus far this year,

0:25:21.200 --> 0:25:25.520
<v Speaker 1>we haven't pictured Andy Fletcher. Nine out of eleven have

0:25:25.680 --> 0:25:28.960
<v Speaker 1>gone under. With Andy Fletcher calling balls and strikes. Again,

0:25:29.080 --> 0:25:30.840
<v Speaker 1>this is the opposite of what we were just talking about.

0:25:30.840 --> 0:25:33.040
<v Speaker 1>And maybe the strike zone is super duper wide here.

0:25:33.440 --> 0:25:37.880
<v Speaker 1>Joe West, Oh Cowboy. Joe West eleven of fourteen under

0:25:38.000 --> 0:25:42.120
<v Speaker 1>thus far this year. Rob Drake ten of thirteen thus

0:25:42.160 --> 0:25:45.320
<v Speaker 1>far this year under Nick Marley pictured pictured, But that's

0:25:45.359 --> 0:25:49.600
<v Speaker 1>also a small sample size. Jeff Jerry meals eleven out

0:25:49.640 --> 0:25:52.040
<v Speaker 1>of fifteen thus far this year when he's called balls

0:25:52.040 --> 0:25:54.320
<v Speaker 1>and strikes have gone under the total, and I'll add

0:25:54.440 --> 0:25:58.080
<v Speaker 1>Lance Barksdale nine out of thirteen have gone under. Then

0:25:58.680 --> 0:26:00.879
<v Speaker 1>a trio will close it out with that. Pat Holberg,

0:26:01.000 --> 0:26:05.280
<v Speaker 1>Kerwin Danley, and Eric Cooper eight out of twelve under

0:26:05.480 --> 0:26:08.159
<v Speaker 1>the total when they've called balls and strikes this year.

0:26:08.200 --> 0:26:13.359
<v Speaker 1>Any familiar names there, Mark, Eric Cooper. Eric Cooper is

0:26:13.480 --> 0:26:16.800
<v Speaker 1>number five and run suppression to strike out rate is

0:26:16.880 --> 0:26:20.120
<v Speaker 1>eight percent better than average, and that pretty much gives

0:26:20.200 --> 0:26:23.159
<v Speaker 1>him his uh his rating and The other guy that

0:26:23.240 --> 0:26:25.919
<v Speaker 1>I always have to bring up and and I remember

0:26:25.960 --> 0:26:27.680
<v Speaker 1>you brought this up on on the Q one was

0:26:27.800 --> 0:26:31.560
<v Speaker 1>Mike Esterbrook. He's the third Yes, he's the third UH

0:26:32.960 --> 0:26:36.480
<v Speaker 1>leader in run suppression from a from an umpire standpoint.

0:26:36.640 --> 0:26:38.399
<v Speaker 1>And I was watching the game when when he was

0:26:38.560 --> 0:26:41.200
<v Speaker 1>behind the plane, and I just he called a pitch

0:26:41.359 --> 0:26:43.800
<v Speaker 1>a strike and it was it was a foot outside

0:26:43.840 --> 0:26:46.920
<v Speaker 1>of the zone, and I just I just had your voice,

0:26:46.960 --> 0:26:48.320
<v Speaker 1>the voice of sports betting in the back of my

0:26:48.400 --> 0:26:51.320
<v Speaker 1>mind saying, yeah, that guy, that guy's calling calling he's

0:26:51.359 --> 0:26:54.040
<v Speaker 1>calling ball strikes a lot. Basically, did you happen to

0:26:54.040 --> 0:26:56.199
<v Speaker 1>see Angel hernana is behind home plate last night, by

0:26:56.200 --> 0:26:59.400
<v Speaker 1>the way, and the Angels Cardinals game? Neither I did.

0:26:59.680 --> 0:27:02.120
<v Speaker 1>I watched some of that game, Gil, and I thought,

0:27:02.280 --> 0:27:06.040
<v Speaker 1>this guy, he wants to be Leslie Nielsen from The

0:27:06.440 --> 0:27:08.760
<v Speaker 1>Naked Gun. I mean, that's that's what the guys go

0:27:08.960 --> 0:27:10.880
<v Speaker 1>in life. There is I think, rather than be a professional.

0:27:11.200 --> 0:27:14.119
<v Speaker 1>Neither team had any idea what he was doing, like,

0:27:14.280 --> 0:27:16.679
<v Speaker 1>and it was so bad. His balls and strikes were

0:27:16.760 --> 0:27:20.400
<v Speaker 1>so inconsistent and so bad that it was beyond arguing.

0:27:20.680 --> 0:27:23.080
<v Speaker 1>You know, when someone is so is so poor at

0:27:23.080 --> 0:27:25.800
<v Speaker 1>the performance you can't even muster up the energy or

0:27:25.840 --> 0:27:28.160
<v Speaker 1>the emotion. Are you just stare at him. You stare

0:27:28.160 --> 0:27:30.280
<v Speaker 1>at the strikes and it was incredible last night. By

0:27:30.320 --> 0:27:32.879
<v Speaker 1>the way, Esterbrook seven out of fourteen, he's seven and

0:27:32.960 --> 0:27:34.960
<v Speaker 1>seven over and unders thus far this year. But what

0:27:35.080 --> 0:27:38.600
<v Speaker 1>you're saying is historically he's very much of an under umpire.

0:27:38.720 --> 0:27:42.080
<v Speaker 1>So again we talked about what is narrative and what

0:27:42.320 --> 0:27:44.640
<v Speaker 1>is what is sustainable In the case of a guy

0:27:44.720 --> 0:27:47.359
<v Speaker 1>like Esterbrook. The seven and seven might actually throw you

0:27:47.440 --> 0:27:50.679
<v Speaker 1>off some some actual good knowledge that Mark is giving us.

0:27:50.720 --> 0:27:54.320
<v Speaker 1>So just a review that real quick. Jeffrey Kellogg is

0:27:54.359 --> 0:27:56.160
<v Speaker 1>a name you want to focus on when he shows

0:27:56.200 --> 0:27:59.120
<v Speaker 1>up an assignments behind home played as an over umpire

0:27:59.720 --> 0:28:05.280
<v Speaker 1>and to um Eric Koper and Mike Esterbrook two names

0:28:05.720 --> 0:28:09.159
<v Speaker 1>that historically with Cooper also also doing it this year

0:28:09.240 --> 0:28:12.000
<v Speaker 1>already in the first half as well. Those are historically

0:28:12.080 --> 0:28:16.040
<v Speaker 1>reliable under umpires. Mark borcher from Clear Data Sports you

0:28:16.080 --> 0:28:18.639
<v Speaker 1>can follow him on Twitter at clear Data Sports. Thank you,

0:28:18.760 --> 0:28:21.880
<v Speaker 1>my friend. I appreciate that. My pleasure. Jil nice talking

0:28:22.040 --> 0:28:25.359
<v Speaker 1>with you, Mark borcherd with the historical umpires that those

0:28:25.440 --> 0:28:29.359
<v Speaker 1>are huge for totals. Betters coming back, we'll take a

0:28:29.400 --> 0:28:31.119
<v Speaker 1>break from the stats. We'll talk to Paul Sport about

0:28:31.119 --> 0:28:34.200
<v Speaker 1>how he feels about the season right now midway through

0:28:34.560 --> 0:28:37.479
<v Speaker 1>the division races, and we'll get a little DFS from

0:28:37.560 --> 0:28:40.240
<v Speaker 1>him on a short card on the major league schedule

0:28:40.360 --> 0:28:42.560
<v Speaker 1>seven games, but maybe he has some thoughts for your

0:28:42.640 --> 0:28:45.360
<v Speaker 1>DFS place today coming back on a Numbers game at Visa.

0:28:46.040 --> 0:28:49.160
<v Speaker 1>Down back to a Numbers game with your host Gil Alexander,

0:28:49.360 --> 0:28:52.320
<v Speaker 1>broadcasting live from our Visa in studios in Laws, Vegas.

0:28:52.440 --> 0:28:54.400
<v Speaker 1>In between segments here at Visa, we run a in

0:28:54.480 --> 0:28:57.560
<v Speaker 1>case you missed Visa last week sort of montage if

0:28:57.600 --> 0:29:00.200
<v Speaker 1>you will, from UH shows in the previous week, that

0:29:00.280 --> 0:29:02.720
<v Speaker 1>one with a Dave farre in a mall, Kelly, they

0:29:02.800 --> 0:29:04.280
<v Speaker 1>have like a tail of the table too. I don't

0:29:04.280 --> 0:29:05.600
<v Speaker 1>know if I didn't know those two had beef, by

0:29:05.600 --> 0:29:08.560
<v Speaker 1>the way, the slight trash talk a day when the

0:29:08.640 --> 0:29:11.400
<v Speaker 1>ball was off, so we decided to make a graphic

0:29:11.440 --> 0:29:15.240
<v Speaker 1>floor when a ball came back against each other. I'm

0:29:15.240 --> 0:29:17.240
<v Speaker 1>saying with Mitch and PAULI earlier in our cross talk

0:29:17.320 --> 0:29:19.320
<v Speaker 1>this morning that if I ever complained to you about

0:29:19.320 --> 0:29:22.440
<v Speaker 1>a bad beat again, Kelly, please stop me. Mid sentence

0:29:22.880 --> 0:29:26.400
<v Speaker 1>because last night I had the over in the Angels

0:29:26.520 --> 0:29:29.680
<v Speaker 1>Cardinals Sunday night baseball game. Did you see this last night?

0:29:30.240 --> 0:29:32.120
<v Speaker 1>I saw bits a piece of it early, I did

0:29:32.200 --> 0:29:34.880
<v Speaker 1>not see the edge. It was two to nothing headed

0:29:34.920 --> 0:29:37.360
<v Speaker 1>into the ninth. The total you could have gotten an

0:29:37.360 --> 0:29:39.600
<v Speaker 1>eight and a half, but it closed it nine. It

0:29:39.720 --> 0:29:41.480
<v Speaker 1>was two to nothing headed into the ninth, and the

0:29:41.640 --> 0:29:45.280
<v Speaker 1>Angels when all nuts on the Cardinals bullpen. They were

0:29:45.320 --> 0:29:47.560
<v Speaker 1>dinking them to death. I think there was finally an

0:29:47.600 --> 0:29:50.320
<v Speaker 1>extra base hitting this game. It was of all people,

0:29:50.400 --> 0:29:52.880
<v Speaker 1>Justin Bower had the face of the first extra base

0:29:52.960 --> 0:29:55.920
<v Speaker 1>hitting this game. Anyway, the Angels played in four runs

0:29:56.000 --> 0:29:57.920
<v Speaker 1>in the top of the ninth to make it six

0:29:58.000 --> 0:30:00.240
<v Speaker 1>to nothing. By the way they left the bases j Coost,

0:30:00.520 --> 0:30:02.520
<v Speaker 1>so it could have been more. So if you were

0:30:02.520 --> 0:30:04.800
<v Speaker 1>a totals better and you're like, oh man, that would

0:30:04.800 --> 0:30:07.320
<v Speaker 1>have been a miracle. Oh my goodness if they had,

0:30:07.520 --> 0:30:08.920
<v Speaker 1>if they had had one more swing in the bat,

0:30:08.960 --> 0:30:10.640
<v Speaker 1>we would have had the over. But they left the

0:30:10.640 --> 0:30:13.040
<v Speaker 1>bases loaded, so sixty nothing. Oh well, we gave it

0:30:13.080 --> 0:30:15.239
<v Speaker 1>a run. Yeah, I'm looking at the box wor right now,

0:30:15.320 --> 0:30:18.120
<v Speaker 1>and you know, I know, doing the show Saturday or

0:30:18.320 --> 0:30:20.760
<v Speaker 1>Sunday yesterday, I bet across America with a ball. He

0:30:20.880 --> 0:30:23.840
<v Speaker 1>had mentioned that. Uh, I forget exactly what gave it

0:30:23.960 --> 0:30:26.520
<v Speaker 1>was from Saturday where he had the over. I think

0:30:26.560 --> 0:30:28.920
<v Speaker 1>it was eight and a half and two of the

0:30:28.960 --> 0:30:31.000
<v Speaker 1>team scored eight runs I think in the first dating

0:30:31.160 --> 0:30:32.800
<v Speaker 1>or for the first two, and he had to sweat

0:30:32.840 --> 0:30:34.440
<v Speaker 1>it out to the last dating where they played at

0:30:34.480 --> 0:30:37.360
<v Speaker 1>a ninth. Well, so this one last night, so as

0:30:37.360 --> 0:30:39.400
<v Speaker 1>I said, six to nothing, they left the bases loaded,

0:30:39.400 --> 0:30:41.520
<v Speaker 1>and even if you had some inkling of a miracle,

0:30:41.600 --> 0:30:43.000
<v Speaker 1>you were like, oh, well that was fun to even

0:30:43.160 --> 0:30:44.920
<v Speaker 1>play it out that much, to even have a shot

0:30:44.960 --> 0:30:47.160
<v Speaker 1>at it, to get the to get the winning run

0:30:47.200 --> 0:30:49.320
<v Speaker 1>to the plate for your total. So then the bottom

0:30:49.320 --> 0:30:51.720
<v Speaker 1>of the ninth shows up and it's quickly two outs,

0:30:51.800 --> 0:30:53.640
<v Speaker 1>nobody on. It's still six to nothing, and you're not

0:30:53.720 --> 0:30:56.280
<v Speaker 1>even thinking, you're not even thinking about what's going on.

0:30:56.760 --> 0:30:59.280
<v Speaker 1>And then Martinez, out of nowhere hits a solo shot.

0:30:59.320 --> 0:31:01.160
<v Speaker 1>You're like, oh, why out so there won't be a shoutout.

0:31:01.480 --> 0:31:05.960
<v Speaker 1>It's six to one, and then Molina singles and batter

0:31:06.080 --> 0:31:09.880
<v Speaker 1>walks and Colton Wong. Then Jack's a two R B

0:31:10.560 --> 0:31:13.320
<v Speaker 1>two RB I double and it's six to three and

0:31:13.400 --> 0:31:16.520
<v Speaker 1>you're like, oh my god, you've gotta be kidding me.

0:31:16.960 --> 0:31:21.720
<v Speaker 1>And then Dexter Fowler with this bloop excuse me single

0:31:21.840 --> 0:31:25.120
<v Speaker 1>into right field and Wong scores from second and over

0:31:25.280 --> 0:31:29.200
<v Speaker 1>Betters go crazy and under Betters, I just want to

0:31:29.280 --> 0:31:31.760
<v Speaker 1>hug all of you. That is one of the worst

0:31:31.880 --> 0:31:35.800
<v Speaker 1>beats ever. Um in a season full of just horrible

0:31:35.840 --> 0:31:38.680
<v Speaker 1>beats every night, it seems like a crazy weekend overall. Yeah,

0:31:39.240 --> 0:31:41.720
<v Speaker 1>a weekend that had, you know, three consecutive walk offs

0:31:41.800 --> 0:31:45.000
<v Speaker 1>from Dodgers rookies, which has never happened again. There was

0:31:45.040 --> 0:31:50.080
<v Speaker 1>also the amazing thing in Pittsburgh where the Padres gave

0:31:50.160 --> 0:31:52.760
<v Speaker 1>up to three run leads after the eighth that hasn't

0:31:52.800 --> 0:31:55.160
<v Speaker 1>happened in eighty five seasons. And then the Yankees can't

0:31:55.160 --> 0:31:57.320
<v Speaker 1>stop hitting home runs twenty six straight games, which is

0:31:57.360 --> 0:31:59.760
<v Speaker 1>a franchise record. We bring in Paul's borer here at

0:31:59.760 --> 0:32:02.520
<v Speaker 1>the way marker, just right around the halfway mark of

0:32:02.560 --> 0:32:04.840
<v Speaker 1>the Major League Baseball season. Paul from Fan Grass and

0:32:04.880 --> 0:32:07.440
<v Speaker 1>the Sleeper in the Bus podcast. Great time to have

0:32:07.560 --> 0:32:10.680
<v Speaker 1>you here. Good morning to you, PAULI morning Gale. How's

0:32:10.720 --> 0:32:12.400
<v Speaker 1>it going going very well? Did you see that game

0:32:12.480 --> 0:32:15.320
<v Speaker 1>last night. I did. I saw the end of it.

0:32:15.800 --> 0:32:17.600
<v Speaker 1>I saw the last few innings there and it was

0:32:17.920 --> 0:32:21.160
<v Speaker 1>absolutely insane. And um, I didn't have anything on it,

0:32:21.280 --> 0:32:24.080
<v Speaker 1>but that I thought about. I thought about the handies chapters,

0:32:25.040 --> 0:32:27.320
<v Speaker 1>the ones who got lucky and the ones who got

0:32:27.360 --> 0:32:30.680
<v Speaker 1>absolutely snake bitten by it. Just it's just incredible. What

0:32:30.800 --> 0:32:33.560
<v Speaker 1>a what a uh? Every night in baseball there's some

0:32:33.680 --> 0:32:36.040
<v Speaker 1>ridiculous story that might have been the worst of all

0:32:36.080 --> 0:32:38.720
<v Speaker 1>of them. The Mariners have rounded the halfway mark of

0:32:38.800 --> 0:32:41.320
<v Speaker 1>the season, so it gave us a license to do

0:32:41.440 --> 0:32:43.840
<v Speaker 1>a Q two derivative show today. I'm curious with you,

0:32:43.960 --> 0:32:47.760
<v Speaker 1>though about these division races, how you feel about all

0:32:47.800 --> 0:32:50.200
<v Speaker 1>of them? And let's start in within the American League East,

0:32:50.520 --> 0:32:53.880
<v Speaker 1>where the Yankees, Uh Yankees. Right now, PAULI, they have

0:32:54.040 --> 0:32:57.640
<v Speaker 1>a four and a half game lead over the Raise,

0:32:57.800 --> 0:32:59.800
<v Speaker 1>eight games up on the Red Sox. If you look

0:32:59.800 --> 0:33:02.560
<v Speaker 1>at the betting odds, the Yankees are at minus to

0:33:03.160 --> 0:33:06.720
<v Speaker 1>sixty this per William Hill. The Rays plus three fifty,

0:33:06.760 --> 0:33:09.280
<v Speaker 1>the Red Sox plus five hundred. We won't even mention

0:33:09.320 --> 0:33:12.200
<v Speaker 1>the Blue Jays and Orioles numbers, which are you just

0:33:12.240 --> 0:33:16.000
<v Speaker 1>threw up a number just to throw one up. But

0:33:16.080 --> 0:33:18.520
<v Speaker 1>how do you feel about the Yankees in this division? They,

0:33:18.680 --> 0:33:21.080
<v Speaker 1>I would assume, in your opinion, or the team to

0:33:21.200 --> 0:33:23.240
<v Speaker 1>beat here. And could this even increase from four and

0:33:23.280 --> 0:33:26.800
<v Speaker 1>a half? Yeah, I mean it certainly could. Obviously, they've

0:33:26.840 --> 0:33:31.400
<v Speaker 1>done what they've done with just an immeasurable number of injuries,

0:33:31.440 --> 0:33:34.040
<v Speaker 1>and now they're starting to get guys back, like insane

0:33:34.120 --> 0:33:38.720
<v Speaker 1>guys you know, uh, Jim Carlos, Stanton, Aaron Judge coming back.

0:33:39.040 --> 0:33:41.000
<v Speaker 1>When you get pieces like that, of course they're going

0:33:41.040 --> 0:33:43.120
<v Speaker 1>to be aggressive at the break or at the deadline

0:33:43.160 --> 0:33:45.920
<v Speaker 1>as well. So yeah, I can definitely see it growing.

0:33:46.920 --> 0:33:48.760
<v Speaker 1>You know, they can always fall on hard times and

0:33:49.080 --> 0:33:52.240
<v Speaker 1>and maybe have the Rays catch them, but it's a

0:33:52.280 --> 0:33:54.240
<v Speaker 1>long shot. Right now. I really got to think that

0:33:54.880 --> 0:33:57.800
<v Speaker 1>they're the class of that division and probably the class

0:33:57.840 --> 0:33:59.320
<v Speaker 1>of the A L because of what they were able

0:33:59.360 --> 0:34:02.560
<v Speaker 1>to do, and now they're gonna have their whole team likely, right,

0:34:02.560 --> 0:34:04.720
<v Speaker 1>And of course the injuries could continue to strike, but

0:34:05.240 --> 0:34:07.880
<v Speaker 1>they've had some of the worst injury luck in a

0:34:08.000 --> 0:34:10.640
<v Speaker 1>half season that I've ever seen, and they've they've maintained,

0:34:11.320 --> 0:34:15.200
<v Speaker 1>not only maintained, they've excelled in spite of it. Yeah,

0:34:15.440 --> 0:34:17.960
<v Speaker 1>you've got a favor the Yankees right now. I don't

0:34:18.000 --> 0:34:20.879
<v Speaker 1>know how you could really convince yourself that the Rais

0:34:21.000 --> 0:34:23.200
<v Speaker 1>or Red Sox are our favorites there. For sure, you

0:34:23.280 --> 0:34:25.440
<v Speaker 1>might want to bet on them, but you couldn't convince

0:34:25.520 --> 0:34:28.480
<v Speaker 1>yourself that you're doing anything but taking a long shot. Well,

0:34:28.800 --> 0:34:31.080
<v Speaker 1>they're they're not fair, right, The Yankees are minus to sixty.

0:34:31.120 --> 0:34:33.720
<v Speaker 1>The question becomes, are the Rays at plus three fifty

0:34:33.800 --> 0:34:35.440
<v Speaker 1>or the Red Sox at five to one? Are they

0:34:35.600 --> 0:34:39.000
<v Speaker 1>worth a bet down four and a half and eight, respectively.

0:34:39.280 --> 0:34:41.680
<v Speaker 1>And what I'm getting from that is not exactly you

0:34:42.000 --> 0:34:45.040
<v Speaker 1>would not make those bets. The Raises only one I

0:34:45.120 --> 0:34:47.759
<v Speaker 1>might consider. I really like what their squad has. But

0:34:47.880 --> 0:34:49.480
<v Speaker 1>with the Red Sox, you know, I was kind of

0:34:49.520 --> 0:34:52.040
<v Speaker 1>worried about, and I think we even talked about it

0:34:52.080 --> 0:34:54.840
<v Speaker 1>on the show in in the spring. Their bullpen, you know,

0:34:54.880 --> 0:34:57.279
<v Speaker 1>they didn't do anything with it, and it's really not

0:34:58.000 --> 0:34:59.600
<v Speaker 1>any good at this point. And they got a few

0:34:59.640 --> 0:35:01.800
<v Speaker 1>pieces of that are working the right way, but that

0:35:01.960 --> 0:35:04.600
<v Speaker 1>you have to have debt. We we've talked about bullpen.

0:35:04.640 --> 0:35:06.400
<v Speaker 1>You know, it's great to have one or two guys,

0:35:07.040 --> 0:35:09.440
<v Speaker 1>uh these days, but you really need four or five

0:35:09.560 --> 0:35:11.640
<v Speaker 1>or six that you can rely on, and of course

0:35:11.920 --> 0:35:13.880
<v Speaker 1>we know the ups and downs with the rotation. Chris

0:35:14.000 --> 0:35:16.520
<v Speaker 1>tals back on tract. David Price has been great, but

0:35:16.680 --> 0:35:19.799
<v Speaker 1>Porcello and I rod a Ardo Rodriguez at the back end,

0:35:19.840 --> 0:35:22.799
<v Speaker 1>they're not really steady. And the offense is is still

0:35:22.920 --> 0:35:25.320
<v Speaker 1>great though that'd be what you'd be banking on. But no,

0:35:25.400 --> 0:35:27.480
<v Speaker 1>I'd rather go raise between the two if I were

0:35:27.480 --> 0:35:28.920
<v Speaker 1>going to take If I'm going to take a bet

0:35:29.000 --> 0:35:30.560
<v Speaker 1>in the A l E. What's interesting about the Red

0:35:30.600 --> 0:35:32.920
<v Speaker 1>Sox And sometimes when the team performs sort of middling

0:35:33.000 --> 0:35:34.719
<v Speaker 1>like this after winning a World Series, you're like, oh,

0:35:34.760 --> 0:35:38.279
<v Speaker 1>they're lurking beneath, they're sneaking. There's nothing about this team

0:35:38.320 --> 0:35:40.600
<v Speaker 1>that feels like they're lurking in any way. Like I

0:35:40.719 --> 0:35:45.080
<v Speaker 1>just don't see a surge from them exactly because you know,

0:35:45.160 --> 0:35:49.280
<v Speaker 1>the offenses is, you know, clicking on on not every cylinder,

0:35:49.400 --> 0:35:53.279
<v Speaker 1>but but it's going quite well. While Mookie Bets maybe

0:35:53.360 --> 0:35:56.800
<v Speaker 1>isn't at the peak that you would expect quote unquote

0:35:56.840 --> 0:36:00.840
<v Speaker 1>only an eight fifty two ops. Guys like Raphael Davers

0:36:00.880 --> 0:36:03.880
<v Speaker 1>and Zander Bogarts have picked up the slack and so

0:36:04.520 --> 0:36:06.640
<v Speaker 1>even if even if you would assume that maybe in

0:36:06.680 --> 0:36:09.799
<v Speaker 1>bets and J. D. Martinez would maybe surged forward, you'd

0:36:09.840 --> 0:36:12.360
<v Speaker 1>probably have to bake down, you know, bring down Bogard's

0:36:12.440 --> 0:36:15.000
<v Speaker 1>endeavors a little bit to even it out. Uh, Andrew

0:36:15.000 --> 0:36:16.560
<v Speaker 1>man Attende has been someone who has been kind of

0:36:16.640 --> 0:36:19.120
<v Speaker 1>slow this year. But again, I just don't I'm with you.

0:36:19.239 --> 0:36:22.440
<v Speaker 1>I can't really map out a scenario or they super

0:36:22.560 --> 0:36:26.080
<v Speaker 1>surge forward. Alright, Ale Central talking to Paul Sport from

0:36:26.080 --> 0:36:29.439
<v Speaker 1>Fangraphs at sport spo r e Er on Twitter. Also

0:36:29.480 --> 0:36:32.680
<v Speaker 1>the Sleeper in the Bus podcast. Twins eight game lead

0:36:32.800 --> 0:36:35.759
<v Speaker 1>now eight game lead over the Cleveland Indians, which is big,

0:36:35.920 --> 0:36:38.880
<v Speaker 1>but uh, you know, just a little uncomfortable with the

0:36:38.920 --> 0:36:41.560
<v Speaker 1>Twins coming back down to earth a little bit. Twins

0:36:41.640 --> 0:36:43.600
<v Speaker 1>minus nine thousand to win the Vision. You don't want

0:36:43.640 --> 0:36:45.560
<v Speaker 1>to make that bet. But how about the Indians that

0:36:45.760 --> 0:36:48.480
<v Speaker 1>tend to one? Does that interest you at all? With

0:36:48.640 --> 0:36:52.840
<v Speaker 1>a very easy schedule coming up in the next thirty days, however,

0:36:53.320 --> 0:36:58.640
<v Speaker 1>still no Clubber, still no Clevinger, still no Carrasco. So

0:36:58.880 --> 0:37:01.640
<v Speaker 1>brutal to have Clevinger come off the d come off

0:37:01.680 --> 0:37:04.319
<v Speaker 1>the I l and sprain his ankle right away now,

0:37:04.360 --> 0:37:06.920
<v Speaker 1>this one shouldn't be too bad, but it is kind

0:37:06.960 --> 0:37:09.560
<v Speaker 1>of brutal to have that happen. You mentioned Cluber's out

0:37:09.800 --> 0:37:11.440
<v Speaker 1>he got hit in the forum with the pitch and

0:37:11.560 --> 0:37:15.120
<v Speaker 1>broke it, and Carrasco is dealing with a total, you know,

0:37:15.239 --> 0:37:17.800
<v Speaker 1>off field type of deal with the blood issue, and

0:37:17.960 --> 0:37:22.640
<v Speaker 1>so yeah, I mean it is. It isn't terrible at eight,

0:37:22.760 --> 0:37:25.399
<v Speaker 1>and you mentioned the easy schedule. That division is so bad.

0:37:25.480 --> 0:37:27.040
<v Speaker 1>Of course the Twins are gonna be able to beat

0:37:27.120 --> 0:37:30.239
<v Speaker 1>up on that division as well. I really don't see them.

0:37:30.400 --> 0:37:33.080
<v Speaker 1>I really don't see Cleveland making a massive surge. They

0:37:33.160 --> 0:37:36.359
<v Speaker 1>might make it close where they're within three or four

0:37:36.480 --> 0:37:38.399
<v Speaker 1>by seasons, then make it look like more of a race.

0:37:38.920 --> 0:37:41.279
<v Speaker 1>But I picked Minnesota at the beginning. I'm gonna stick

0:37:41.320 --> 0:37:43.279
<v Speaker 1>with that one. I like what they're doing and they're

0:37:43.280 --> 0:37:46.680
<v Speaker 1>gonna add as well. Whereas Cleveland, I think I'd be

0:37:46.760 --> 0:37:48.759
<v Speaker 1>surprised if they add because if they if they weren't

0:37:48.760 --> 0:37:51.640
<v Speaker 1>gonna do anything at free agency, what makes what makes

0:37:51.719 --> 0:37:53.319
<v Speaker 1>us think they're going to trade away if they can't

0:37:53.320 --> 0:37:56.520
<v Speaker 1>spend just money, What makes us think they're gonna take

0:37:56.560 --> 0:37:59.680
<v Speaker 1>away trade assets and spend money. That's the thing with

0:37:59.760 --> 0:38:01.720
<v Speaker 1>these Like, we talked about this with season win totals

0:38:01.760 --> 0:38:04.120
<v Speaker 1>before the season, who's going to be in a sell

0:38:04.200 --> 0:38:06.279
<v Speaker 1>off at the deadline. Some of these teams that are

0:38:06.520 --> 0:38:08.440
<v Speaker 1>that are in it still could be selling off of

0:38:08.440 --> 0:38:11.400
<v Speaker 1>the deadline. Namely, let's take the a L West Houston

0:38:11.880 --> 0:38:15.239
<v Speaker 1>with a tantalizing le narrow six and a half game

0:38:15.360 --> 0:38:17.840
<v Speaker 1>lead in the American League West. You look up at

0:38:17.880 --> 0:38:20.439
<v Speaker 1>the standings, You're like, wow, that's not nearly as wide

0:38:20.480 --> 0:38:22.920
<v Speaker 1>as it once was. Rangers, who are six and a

0:38:22.960 --> 0:38:25.880
<v Speaker 1>half back, are sevent team to one courtesy of William

0:38:25.960 --> 0:38:28.600
<v Speaker 1>Hill to win the division. Both the A's and the Angels,

0:38:28.600 --> 0:38:31.440
<v Speaker 1>who are eight and ten games back respectively, they're thirty

0:38:31.520 --> 0:38:33.920
<v Speaker 1>to one. Would you take a flyer on any of

0:38:34.000 --> 0:38:38.440
<v Speaker 1>those three teams? Boy, I don't think so. I mean,

0:38:38.640 --> 0:38:41.919
<v Speaker 1>the Astros made it look and made it look close

0:38:42.000 --> 0:38:44.880
<v Speaker 1>recently because they were on a big losing streak before yesterday,

0:38:45.760 --> 0:38:48.239
<v Speaker 1>and you know, so it looks a lot closer than

0:38:48.320 --> 0:38:51.279
<v Speaker 1>it is because of when we're looking at it. Both

0:38:51.320 --> 0:38:54.799
<v Speaker 1>of those clubs, the Rangers and the A's. Rangers specifically

0:38:54.880 --> 0:38:57.560
<v Speaker 1>have been really impressive this year. Folks were expecting the

0:38:57.640 --> 0:39:00.200
<v Speaker 1>A's to do something and they found back. You're a

0:39:00.280 --> 0:39:02.360
<v Speaker 1>slow start, and even the Angels are kind of lurking.

0:39:02.680 --> 0:39:05.479
<v Speaker 1>They just don't have enough pitching. Uh No, I can't

0:39:05.520 --> 0:39:08.400
<v Speaker 1>really convince myself to go up against that Houston juggernaut

0:39:08.520 --> 0:39:12.080
<v Speaker 1>because it's not it's not even playing at peak performance.

0:39:12.120 --> 0:39:14.279
<v Speaker 1>In my opinion, that is a team I could see

0:39:14.360 --> 0:39:17.560
<v Speaker 1>surging and their forty nine and thirty. So when you're

0:39:17.560 --> 0:39:20.000
<v Speaker 1>a team that that's that good that you could feasibly

0:39:20.080 --> 0:39:23.160
<v Speaker 1>see taking a leap in the second half, I don't

0:39:23.160 --> 0:39:26.080
<v Speaker 1>want to mess with anything there between the Rangers, A's

0:39:26.360 --> 0:39:28.239
<v Speaker 1>or or of course the Angels, which are the super

0:39:28.320 --> 0:39:30.600
<v Speaker 1>long shot. I'm with you, I wouldn't touch any of them.

0:39:30.960 --> 0:39:32.480
<v Speaker 1>I wouldn't do it with you your money. Let's go

0:39:32.520 --> 0:39:34.840
<v Speaker 1>to the National League East Atlanta Braves now with a

0:39:34.920 --> 0:39:37.960
<v Speaker 1>six and a half game lead similarly in the East

0:39:38.280 --> 0:39:40.960
<v Speaker 1>over the Phillies, who have just been getting destroyed. They've

0:39:41.000 --> 0:39:43.120
<v Speaker 1>lost seven in a row. Braves, with the six and

0:39:43.120 --> 0:39:44.840
<v Speaker 1>a half game lead over the Phills, eight and a

0:39:44.840 --> 0:39:48.000
<v Speaker 1>half over the Gnats, nine over the Mets, Braves are

0:39:48.080 --> 0:39:50.839
<v Speaker 1>minus one fifty to win this division. Over at William Hill.

0:39:51.120 --> 0:39:54.720
<v Speaker 1>The Phillies are very shortly priced at plus one fifty.

0:39:55.320 --> 0:39:59.520
<v Speaker 1>That's twelve to one met seventeen to one. Anything with

0:39:59.600 --> 0:40:02.160
<v Speaker 1>the with the Gnats that that excites you there or

0:40:02.440 --> 0:40:05.560
<v Speaker 1>still just you just can't bring yourself to do it. Gil,

0:40:05.880 --> 0:40:07.680
<v Speaker 1>we we got we gotta break up with the Mats.

0:40:07.920 --> 0:40:10.400
<v Speaker 1>We've really been on them for years. We got we

0:40:10.480 --> 0:40:13.360
<v Speaker 1>gotta dump them. This is a toxic relationship that we're in.

0:40:14.360 --> 0:40:17.239
<v Speaker 1>You know, they've got a core that that makes that

0:40:17.400 --> 0:40:20.480
<v Speaker 1>you can really you can really trick yourself your handicappers

0:40:20.520 --> 0:40:22.680
<v Speaker 1>out there. You're gonna be late night staring at san

0:40:22.760 --> 0:40:25.600
<v Speaker 1>grabs and Baseball reference, really making a case for yourselves

0:40:25.960 --> 0:40:28.840
<v Speaker 1>before you go put down some money. I'd be careful

0:40:28.920 --> 0:40:32.799
<v Speaker 1>because again, once you get past the the offensive core

0:40:33.400 --> 0:40:37.360
<v Speaker 1>and and the awesome Scherzer Strassburg Corbin one two three punch,

0:40:38.360 --> 0:40:41.360
<v Speaker 1>it's it's light and again it comes down to the bullpen,

0:40:41.480 --> 0:40:44.719
<v Speaker 1>which is awful for them. I would say that it's

0:40:44.719 --> 0:40:47.799
<v Speaker 1>almost a miracle that they're even three games under right

0:40:47.840 --> 0:40:49.600
<v Speaker 1>now with the bullpen that they've had. I mean, they

0:40:49.640 --> 0:40:54.040
<v Speaker 1>were chasing down some historical relevance for some for being

0:40:54.480 --> 0:40:58.239
<v Speaker 1>for being awful with their bullpen early on, and it

0:40:58.360 --> 0:41:00.600
<v Speaker 1>has it has regrets back a little bit towards the

0:41:00.680 --> 0:41:02.920
<v Speaker 1>middle there. But who do you like in the bullpen

0:41:03.040 --> 0:41:05.319
<v Speaker 1>besides Sean Doolittle. The thing of it is, even if

0:41:05.360 --> 0:41:07.759
<v Speaker 1>they make moves, even if they if they gut the

0:41:07.800 --> 0:41:10.919
<v Speaker 1>farm system or train a big piece and get two guys,

0:41:11.480 --> 0:41:16.040
<v Speaker 1>the two bullpen guys really flip everything here. I don't

0:41:16.120 --> 0:41:19.120
<v Speaker 1>think so. I mean, you got Doolittle and that's really it.

0:41:20.200 --> 0:41:22.759
<v Speaker 1>And the nerve wracking thing is as as the best

0:41:22.880 --> 0:41:25.239
<v Speaker 1>guy that they have, he's got a little bit of

0:41:25.320 --> 0:41:28.919
<v Speaker 1>a health profile that isn't isn't the most favorable either.

0:41:29.080 --> 0:41:31.840
<v Speaker 1>So no, I can't really carve out the scenario for

0:41:31.920 --> 0:41:34.319
<v Speaker 1>the Gnats. Of course, we will break up with them

0:41:34.320 --> 0:41:35.720
<v Speaker 1>and then this will be the year that they actually

0:41:35.760 --> 0:41:39.000
<v Speaker 1>do it. But I I'd be really really surprised if

0:41:39.040 --> 0:41:40.600
<v Speaker 1>they were able to leap frog. And one of the

0:41:40.680 --> 0:41:43.600
<v Speaker 1>things to be mindful of too is not only um,

0:41:44.160 --> 0:41:46.360
<v Speaker 1>you know, they kind of have three teams. I know

0:41:46.440 --> 0:41:48.239
<v Speaker 1>that Mets aren't ahead of them right now, but they

0:41:48.320 --> 0:41:50.120
<v Speaker 1>could be. You know, in two days, they could be

0:41:50.200 --> 0:41:52.520
<v Speaker 1>right ahead of them. So they're really contending with two

0:41:52.640 --> 0:41:54.960
<v Speaker 1>three teams at any moment. Not that the Mets are

0:41:55.160 --> 0:41:58.000
<v Speaker 1>an organization to be worried. So to be worried about

0:41:58.120 --> 0:42:01.040
<v Speaker 1>right now with the way they're turmoils going, but now

0:42:01.160 --> 0:42:03.600
<v Speaker 1>I can't see it. And with the braves of Phillies

0:42:03.640 --> 0:42:07.000
<v Speaker 1>on short numbers, I'm not touching them. The Phillies are

0:42:07.080 --> 0:42:09.600
<v Speaker 1>only one fifties there with the six and a half

0:42:09.680 --> 0:42:13.000
<v Speaker 1>game deficit. No, you, no way, I'll burn my money,

0:42:13.320 --> 0:42:16.680
<v Speaker 1>you know, forget that. That's that makes no sense to me.

0:42:16.800 --> 0:42:20.359
<v Speaker 1>So and at least is a total layoff, all right, Well,

0:42:20.400 --> 0:42:22.359
<v Speaker 1>the n L Central is the most interesting though, right,

0:42:22.719 --> 0:42:25.680
<v Speaker 1>five and a half total games separating the Cubs at

0:42:25.719 --> 0:42:27.719
<v Speaker 1>the top from both the Pirates and the Reds at

0:42:27.760 --> 0:42:30.600
<v Speaker 1>the bottom. And yet here are your division numbers. Cubs

0:42:30.640 --> 0:42:34.480
<v Speaker 1>plus one twenty, Brewers a half game back plus one sixty,

0:42:34.800 --> 0:42:37.960
<v Speaker 1>Cardinals two games back plus four hundred four to one,

0:42:38.200 --> 0:42:40.040
<v Speaker 1>and then the Reds and the Pirates five and a

0:42:40.080 --> 0:42:43.160
<v Speaker 1>half back, eighteen to one on the Reds, thirty to

0:42:43.239 --> 0:42:48.319
<v Speaker 1>one on the Pirates. A bite here, perhaps I can

0:42:48.360 --> 0:42:50.560
<v Speaker 1>get multiple bites here, to be quite honest, I mean,

0:42:50.640 --> 0:42:53.160
<v Speaker 1>even the Brewers, it's not a great number at plus

0:42:53.239 --> 0:42:56.520
<v Speaker 1>one sixty, but it's such a it's such a good team.

0:42:56.520 --> 0:42:57.960
<v Speaker 1>I really liked them. I think they're going to remain

0:42:58.000 --> 0:43:01.000
<v Speaker 1>aggressive to and make moves at the dead line. Uh,

0:43:01.239 --> 0:43:04.120
<v Speaker 1>the Reds have really intrigued me. This was actually a

0:43:04.200 --> 0:43:07.400
<v Speaker 1>team that I was interested in coming into the season,

0:43:07.480 --> 0:43:09.879
<v Speaker 1>thinking that they could make some noise, and they got

0:43:09.920 --> 0:43:12.080
<v Speaker 1>off to just an atrocious start, and I was like,

0:43:12.440 --> 0:43:15.200
<v Speaker 1>you know, maybe maybe I was a year earlier, just

0:43:15.360 --> 0:43:18.640
<v Speaker 1>dead wrong on that. They went eleven and sixteen, or

0:43:18.880 --> 0:43:21.759
<v Speaker 1>or um twelve and seventeen if you count their their

0:43:21.760 --> 0:43:24.480
<v Speaker 1>too March games as well for March April, and it

0:43:24.600 --> 0:43:27.880
<v Speaker 1>was just looking really bad. Talk about pitching there's was

0:43:28.080 --> 0:43:31.279
<v Speaker 1>just horrific, and they're hitting was actually remarkably in two.

0:43:31.440 --> 0:43:34.640
<v Speaker 1>They didn't really have anything going right their way. Now

0:43:35.120 --> 0:43:37.120
<v Speaker 1>everything's starting to click and we're really seeing what this

0:43:37.200 --> 0:43:40.520
<v Speaker 1>Red team is made of, if this offense can can

0:43:40.640 --> 0:43:43.600
<v Speaker 1>keep it going and you know, get up to a

0:43:43.719 --> 0:43:46.680
<v Speaker 1>level where they belong. Right now, they still only have

0:43:46.840 --> 0:43:50.120
<v Speaker 1>two guys with an OPS plus over one hundred that

0:43:50.160 --> 0:43:53.279
<v Speaker 1>are regular starter. Strick Diatrict doesn't it doesn't quite make

0:43:53.360 --> 0:43:55.800
<v Speaker 1>the grade to be a a full time starter, or

0:43:55.840 --> 0:43:58.160
<v Speaker 1>else they'd have three because he kind of splits time.

0:43:58.200 --> 0:44:01.759
<v Speaker 1>He doesn't start against lefties. But I like this Cincinnati team.

0:44:01.760 --> 0:44:04.239
<v Speaker 1>You look at their Pythagoran when what just looks at

0:44:04.880 --> 0:44:08.600
<v Speaker 1>runs four and again, and they're right there with the Cubs.

0:44:08.719 --> 0:44:11.040
<v Speaker 1>They're they're a half game behind them. So I think

0:44:11.080 --> 0:44:13.759
<v Speaker 1>the Reds as far as my long shot, that's the

0:44:13.840 --> 0:44:15.799
<v Speaker 1>team I'm all the ones we've talked about so far

0:44:15.840 --> 0:44:18.239
<v Speaker 1>in the first five divisions. I'd like to go with

0:44:18.400 --> 0:44:20.200
<v Speaker 1>them for my long shot. And then, like I said,

0:44:20.520 --> 0:44:23.600
<v Speaker 1>the Brewers as well for more of a obvious pet

0:44:23.719 --> 0:44:25.759
<v Speaker 1>but a team that I definitely like. I like it

0:44:25.880 --> 0:44:28.120
<v Speaker 1>Brewers and Reds at thirty to one. We'll take a

0:44:28.200 --> 0:44:30.200
<v Speaker 1>bite on both of those. Paul Sport from Fan Graphs

0:44:30.280 --> 0:44:32.719
<v Speaker 1>right here on the Numbers game at Visa now live

0:44:32.760 --> 0:44:35.600
<v Speaker 1>from the Visa Studios in the South Point Hotel and Casino.

0:44:36.040 --> 0:44:38.879
<v Speaker 1>It's Gil Alexander, our number two of the numbers game.

0:44:38.960 --> 0:44:41.400
<v Speaker 1>Right here at Visa, we're sports Betting Analytics, live, actionable

0:44:41.440 --> 0:44:44.200
<v Speaker 1>sports betting information series x M Channel two four, Visa

0:44:44.320 --> 0:44:48.040
<v Speaker 1>dot Com, the Visa App, Fobo TV, Sling TV, and

0:44:48.239 --> 0:44:51.400
<v Speaker 1>Game Plus, as well throughout Canada, New York City and

0:44:51.440 --> 0:44:55.320
<v Speaker 1>New Jersey's Gil Alexander. Let's continue with our mlb Q

0:44:55.520 --> 0:44:58.479
<v Speaker 1>two derivative stat shows. So again this happens once every quarter.

0:44:58.920 --> 0:45:00.799
<v Speaker 1>We do it We've done on the Poe Cast for years,

0:45:00.840 --> 0:45:03.200
<v Speaker 1>both Beating the Book and Betting Door before that, where

0:45:03.239 --> 0:45:06.040
<v Speaker 1>every quarter of the baseball season we look at betting

0:45:06.120 --> 0:45:08.440
<v Speaker 1>stats and hope to learn something. Again, much of it

0:45:08.560 --> 0:45:12.000
<v Speaker 1>is narrative, but some of it predictive. Some can help

0:45:12.080 --> 0:45:14.319
<v Speaker 1>you with your baseball bets moving forward, and these will

0:45:14.360 --> 0:45:17.359
<v Speaker 1>become more proprietary as we go along here now, UH,

0:45:17.480 --> 0:45:20.360
<v Speaker 1>in the first hour, we did very widely available stats

0:45:20.440 --> 0:45:23.000
<v Speaker 1>covers dot Com a great source for those stats, and

0:45:23.040 --> 0:45:25.880
<v Speaker 1>we talked about umpire assignments again, specifically with the umpire

0:45:25.920 --> 0:45:30.840
<v Speaker 1>segment stat Fox among the sites that have umpire assignments,

0:45:30.840 --> 0:45:33.359
<v Speaker 1>so you know who's going to be behind home plate.

0:45:33.360 --> 0:45:35.480
<v Speaker 1>And again if you missed it, we'll put it up

0:45:35.480 --> 0:45:37.840
<v Speaker 1>in podcast form to give you the names that we

0:45:37.960 --> 0:45:40.520
<v Speaker 1>mentioned that are reliable over and under umps. Let's talk

0:45:40.640 --> 0:45:42.719
<v Speaker 1>first five innings. Now. For years I relied on on

0:45:42.840 --> 0:45:46.000
<v Speaker 1>Side Sports Great Sports app for these UH. They are

0:45:46.080 --> 0:45:49.640
<v Speaker 1>so into there, they are so busy with some UH

0:45:49.800 --> 0:45:51.400
<v Speaker 1>deals that they're making that they were not able to

0:45:51.440 --> 0:45:54.879
<v Speaker 1>provide them for me this time. However, Joe Osmore shout

0:45:54.920 --> 0:45:57.280
<v Speaker 1>out to Joe Osborne who had some five inning stats

0:45:57.320 --> 0:45:59.520
<v Speaker 1>for us, and I went ahead, listen to me, Kelly,

0:45:59.719 --> 0:46:01.560
<v Speaker 1>I did some stuff this weekend. I actually did some

0:46:01.640 --> 0:46:04.799
<v Speaker 1>Morgan updated these through the weekend. How about that. Wow, Yeah,

0:46:07.640 --> 0:46:10.239
<v Speaker 1>somebody got off their button did some work. So these

0:46:10.280 --> 0:46:12.239
<v Speaker 1>are the best and worst first five inning teams in

0:46:12.239 --> 0:46:14.440
<v Speaker 1>all baseball game Joe Osmore providing them. I just updated

0:46:14.480 --> 0:46:17.040
<v Speaker 1>them through the weekend. But in terms of the actual records,

0:46:17.960 --> 0:46:20.719
<v Speaker 1>Twins best first five team in all of baseball for

0:46:20.840 --> 0:46:22.680
<v Speaker 1>the season started. If I had said to you, hey,

0:46:22.920 --> 0:46:24.319
<v Speaker 1>who do you think it's gonna be the best first

0:46:24.400 --> 0:46:28.319
<v Speaker 1>five team in all Baseball's gonna say with the Twins

0:46:28.360 --> 0:46:30.040
<v Speaker 1>have been on your radar, and I finds I'm a

0:46:30.080 --> 0:46:31.960
<v Speaker 1>little surprise to see the Dodgers out there right now.

0:46:32.239 --> 0:46:34.800
<v Speaker 1>Whether you've lost buddy for you on the road, you

0:46:34.800 --> 0:46:37.719
<v Speaker 1>would think they'd be a little little closer to even there. Well,

0:46:37.960 --> 0:46:40.960
<v Speaker 1>So Twins five and ten, these are just the records

0:46:41.000 --> 0:46:43.240
<v Speaker 1>in first five games. Again, remember these could be pushes.

0:46:43.320 --> 0:46:46.680
<v Speaker 1>That's why we have ties here and ten for the Twins.

0:46:47.080 --> 0:46:52.200
<v Speaker 1>Dodgers right behind them fort and eleven. Dodgers record actually better,

0:46:52.800 --> 0:46:54.720
<v Speaker 1>but the amount of money they made for you. Actually

0:46:54.880 --> 0:46:57.440
<v Speaker 1>just just a little lower than that because of what

0:46:57.560 --> 0:46:59.840
<v Speaker 1>Kelly's talking about. Dodgers are favorites a lot and so

0:47:00.000 --> 0:47:03.480
<v Speaker 1>and they lose, it tends to hurt more. Athletics, Yankees,

0:47:03.760 --> 0:47:07.920
<v Speaker 1>Rangers round at the top five. That's a boy. The

0:47:08.040 --> 0:47:11.839
<v Speaker 1>Dodgers and eleven top five or excuse me, a first five,

0:47:12.200 --> 0:47:14.560
<v Speaker 1>but their second best in terms of the record, in

0:47:14.719 --> 0:47:17.080
<v Speaker 1>terms of the money one. So if we went to

0:47:17.320 --> 0:47:22.200
<v Speaker 1>the actual raw stats from Joe Osborne, what we learn

0:47:22.960 --> 0:47:26.239
<v Speaker 1>is that in with those records, the Twins roughly would

0:47:26.239 --> 0:47:28.399
<v Speaker 1>have netted you if you bet them blindly first five

0:47:28.480 --> 0:47:31.920
<v Speaker 1>any game this year, Roughly you're about nine units up

0:47:32.760 --> 0:47:35.400
<v Speaker 1>roughly abount nine units up with the Dodgers. You're up

0:47:35.440 --> 0:47:38.319
<v Speaker 1>around six units because it has to be significantly less

0:47:38.440 --> 0:47:41.120
<v Speaker 1>Dodgers then, right, but Athletics might be around what the

0:47:41.200 --> 0:47:44.279
<v Speaker 1>Dodgers are or maybe by way off uh no, right

0:47:44.360 --> 0:47:47.160
<v Speaker 1>exactly right there there, right on their heels exactly. Athletics

0:47:47.200 --> 0:47:50.120
<v Speaker 1>are excuse me, right around five point seven units somewhere

0:47:50.120 --> 0:47:54.800
<v Speaker 1>in that territory. So it's um, you know again bizarro exercise.

0:47:54.840 --> 0:47:56.799
<v Speaker 1>You wouldn't you wouldn't do this in real life. Bet

0:47:56.880 --> 0:47:59.200
<v Speaker 1>them maybe you would. I don't know, maybe some of

0:47:59.280 --> 0:48:02.120
<v Speaker 1>you would, but you probably shouldn't bet these every single

0:48:02.200 --> 0:48:04.440
<v Speaker 1>day are you're probably doing something wrong. But if you had,

0:48:04.600 --> 0:48:07.120
<v Speaker 1>that's where these shake out. In terms of the bottom five,

0:48:07.719 --> 0:48:11.000
<v Speaker 1>uh worst first five inning teams thus far this year,

0:48:11.520 --> 0:48:13.920
<v Speaker 1>it is the San Francisco Giants that have the worst

0:48:14.040 --> 0:48:20.200
<v Speaker 1>record whatsoever. Forty two and thirteen and first five just Giants.

0:48:20.239 --> 0:48:21.680
<v Speaker 1>I mean, here's the thing though, if you're a Giants

0:48:21.719 --> 0:48:23.759
<v Speaker 1>fan and I said you look, before the decade started,

0:48:23.800 --> 0:48:25.919
<v Speaker 1>I said, here's the deal. You're gonna win three World

0:48:26.040 --> 0:48:28.399
<v Speaker 1>Series in the next five years. You're going to suck

0:48:28.440 --> 0:48:30.759
<v Speaker 1>at baseball after that. Do you take that deal? You

0:48:30.920 --> 0:48:35.000
<v Speaker 1>take it every time? Anybody that's right. Blue Jays, God,

0:48:35.040 --> 0:48:37.040
<v Speaker 1>Blue Jay's come up on this list so many times.

0:48:37.360 --> 0:48:41.839
<v Speaker 1>They're bad at first five to fourteen, Indians, third worst,

0:48:42.440 --> 0:48:44.919
<v Speaker 1>three and fifteen, Tigers and Padres running up the top

0:48:45.360 --> 0:48:47.480
<v Speaker 1>the worst five if you will, by the way, looking

0:48:47.520 --> 0:48:50.400
<v Speaker 1>at with the money, if you had bet the Giants,

0:48:50.680 --> 0:48:52.360
<v Speaker 1>so now, remember when we talked the top, if you

0:48:52.440 --> 0:48:54.759
<v Speaker 1>had bet the Twins, you'd be up nine units and

0:48:54.760 --> 0:48:56.640
<v Speaker 1>you're like a nine units big deal. Every one of

0:48:56.680 --> 0:48:59.359
<v Speaker 1>those games. Well, if you had bet the Giants, you'd

0:48:59.440 --> 0:49:04.759
<v Speaker 1>be down twenty units first five. That is not good. Yeah,

0:49:04.840 --> 0:49:08.200
<v Speaker 1>you do not want Yeah, the the bad are much

0:49:08.320 --> 0:49:10.919
<v Speaker 1>worse than the good are good. In other words, Blue Jays,

0:49:10.920 --> 0:49:13.719
<v Speaker 1>you'd be down about nineteen point five units, and then

0:49:13.760 --> 0:49:16.880
<v Speaker 1>it drops a little. Indians, you'd still be down thirteen

0:49:16.960 --> 0:49:20.239
<v Speaker 1>point three five units, Tigers roughly thirteen units in the

0:49:20.320 --> 0:49:23.839
<v Speaker 1>red padres ten point seven units. That's if you bet

0:49:23.920 --> 0:49:26.600
<v Speaker 1>them again, blindly, each and every first five thus far

0:49:26.719 --> 0:49:29.120
<v Speaker 1>this year. And so you know, you look at those

0:49:29.200 --> 0:49:31.239
<v Speaker 1>both good and bad, and you think yourself, who would

0:49:31.239 --> 0:49:33.720
<v Speaker 1>I have predicted before the season? Well, Dodgers, with those pitchers,

0:49:34.160 --> 0:49:36.000
<v Speaker 1>you probably would have predicted they're gonna have a good

0:49:36.040 --> 0:49:38.759
<v Speaker 1>record no matter what. Um. On the other hand, you

0:49:38.800 --> 0:49:42.080
<v Speaker 1>look at the Indians. The Indians who you you figured, oh,

0:49:42.120 --> 0:49:45.440
<v Speaker 1>it's gonna be Clubber, and it's gonna be Carrasco. You've

0:49:45.440 --> 0:49:48.680
<v Speaker 1>got Trevor Bauer going well, they've had the injuries, they've

0:49:48.719 --> 0:49:52.680
<v Speaker 1>had the you know, the blood issue with Carrasco, Clevinger

0:49:52.840 --> 0:49:57.000
<v Speaker 1>hasn't been there. So the Indians at fifteen hemorrhaging first

0:49:57.040 --> 0:50:00.160
<v Speaker 1>fives just hasn't gone their way. Uh. Four betters us

0:50:00.200 --> 0:50:02.080
<v Speaker 1>far this year. By the way, our friends at team

0:50:02.200 --> 0:50:05.320
<v Speaker 1>Rankings all always provide for us in terms of just

0:50:05.440 --> 0:50:09.040
<v Speaker 1>the raw data, what's the run production and run prevention

0:50:09.120 --> 0:50:12.839
<v Speaker 1>in the first five innings. The Minnesota Twins um they

0:50:13.040 --> 0:50:15.719
<v Speaker 1>no surprise based on their record there, it would not

0:50:15.840 --> 0:50:18.640
<v Speaker 1>be surprising to know that they have scored the most

0:50:18.880 --> 0:50:22.120
<v Speaker 1>runs on average per per first five thus far this year.

0:50:22.400 --> 0:50:26.240
<v Speaker 1>So the Twins are playing three point five three runs

0:50:26.760 --> 0:50:29.480
<v Speaker 1>per first five thus far this year. So that's a

0:50:29.520 --> 0:50:31.759
<v Speaker 1>great betting experience if you can rely on them and

0:50:31.760 --> 0:50:33.600
<v Speaker 1>to get three and a half runs every first five,

0:50:33.920 --> 0:50:36.640
<v Speaker 1>you'll take that every time. By the way, Texas right

0:50:36.680 --> 0:50:39.000
<v Speaker 1>behind them three point three eight. They've shown up on

0:50:39.040 --> 0:50:40.799
<v Speaker 1>a lot of positive boards thus far in the show

0:50:41.160 --> 0:50:44.359
<v Speaker 1>Yankees third three point one four runs per first five.

0:50:45.640 --> 0:50:47.920
<v Speaker 1>You know, they just with the trends were starting to

0:50:48.000 --> 0:50:50.200
<v Speaker 1>see within this show. Rangers are kind of all those

0:50:50.239 --> 0:50:52.719
<v Speaker 1>good boards. Everyone has been on a lot of the

0:50:52.800 --> 0:50:55.279
<v Speaker 1>bad ones. You know, that's exactly right. You see a

0:50:55.280 --> 0:50:57.279
<v Speaker 1>lot of trends. And by the way, the Giants who

0:50:57.360 --> 0:50:59.880
<v Speaker 1>we just mentioned are horrific bottom five in terms of

0:51:00.040 --> 0:51:03.960
<v Speaker 1>first five, they only score they score the fewest runs

0:51:04.120 --> 0:51:08.239
<v Speaker 1>per first five this year one point nine run excuse me,

0:51:08.480 --> 0:51:12.120
<v Speaker 1>one point nine one runs per first five thus far

0:51:12.239 --> 0:51:17.600
<v Speaker 1>this year versus Minnesota's what five point three three point five? Yeah, um,

0:51:17.800 --> 0:51:20.320
<v Speaker 1>but one point nine ones. By by the way, the Marlins,

0:51:20.680 --> 0:51:23.279
<v Speaker 1>just to give you some comparison, score one point nine

0:51:23.480 --> 0:51:27.560
<v Speaker 1>three runs per first five, just just ahead of the Giants,

0:51:27.960 --> 0:51:30.799
<v Speaker 1>Detroit two point zero one, San Diego two point zero six,

0:51:31.080 --> 0:51:34.000
<v Speaker 1>and Toronto, who again flirting with one of the worst

0:51:34.080 --> 0:51:37.160
<v Speaker 1>on base percentages of any team ever just two point

0:51:37.200 --> 0:51:39.640
<v Speaker 1>one five runs per first five thus far this year.

0:51:39.719 --> 0:51:41.960
<v Speaker 1>So just think again, I get back to take yourself

0:51:42.160 --> 0:51:44.440
<v Speaker 1>or remove yourself from the betting experience, from the from

0:51:44.480 --> 0:51:47.640
<v Speaker 1>the betting raw numbers momentarily and just take yourself into

0:51:47.680 --> 0:51:50.600
<v Speaker 1>the betting experience. If you're betting the Giants first five

0:51:50.680 --> 0:51:53.520
<v Speaker 1>this year, not only are you hemorrhaging twenty units if

0:51:53.560 --> 0:51:56.200
<v Speaker 1>you bet them blindly, and you shouldn't be, but they

0:51:56.280 --> 0:51:59.879
<v Speaker 1>only score they score less than two runs per first five.

0:52:00.200 --> 0:52:02.200
<v Speaker 1>How would you like to live through that every night?

0:52:02.840 --> 0:52:05.719
<v Speaker 1>Just absolutely just I don't know how you're betting on

0:52:05.800 --> 0:52:08.200
<v Speaker 1>that team anyway? About it right now? In terms of

0:52:08.280 --> 0:52:11.480
<v Speaker 1>run prevention first five, like, who's the best the Dodgers,

0:52:11.480 --> 0:52:13.239
<v Speaker 1>who end up with the second best with with the

0:52:13.320 --> 0:52:16.840
<v Speaker 1>best record but the second most money. In terms of

0:52:16.920 --> 0:52:19.640
<v Speaker 1>first five, no surprise that they give up the fewest

0:52:19.760 --> 0:52:22.680
<v Speaker 1>runs first five. They only give up one point seven two.

0:52:23.239 --> 0:52:27.880
<v Speaker 1>So they're basically facing a worse version of the Giants

0:52:28.160 --> 0:52:31.200
<v Speaker 1>offense first five, or or I shouldn't say they're facing

0:52:31.640 --> 0:52:34.960
<v Speaker 1>they are making it that they're facing a worse offense

0:52:35.000 --> 0:52:37.399
<v Speaker 1>than the Giants first five only one point seven two

0:52:37.480 --> 0:52:40.920
<v Speaker 1>runs allowed first five thus far this year. The Tampa

0:52:41.040 --> 0:52:44.560
<v Speaker 1>Bay Ray's second best in run prevention first five just

0:52:44.719 --> 0:52:49.320
<v Speaker 1>one point eight three runs allowed first five since Senata

0:52:49.719 --> 0:52:53.280
<v Speaker 1>two point zero one two point zero one runs allowed

0:52:53.600 --> 0:52:56.000
<v Speaker 1>first five thus far this year. That plays into what

0:52:56.120 --> 0:52:58.959
<v Speaker 1>Spora was talking about. They're only five and a half

0:52:59.000 --> 0:53:03.919
<v Speaker 1>games back the Reds in the National League Central. Their

0:53:04.000 --> 0:53:06.919
<v Speaker 1>run differential is right on the heels of the first

0:53:06.960 --> 0:53:09.040
<v Speaker 1>place Cubs, and much of that has to do with

0:53:09.120 --> 0:53:12.600
<v Speaker 1>this great starting pitching performance here and I'll have to

0:53:12.719 --> 0:53:15.200
<v Speaker 1>look it up, but they're you know, they're over under record.

0:53:15.280 --> 0:53:17.120
<v Speaker 1>The Unders are incredible. I think I think they're the

0:53:17.160 --> 0:53:19.080
<v Speaker 1>best team in the baseball right now to the under.

0:53:19.200 --> 0:53:22.319
<v Speaker 1>I mean, they're just they're preventing, but they're not scoring either.

0:53:23.200 --> 0:53:26.359
<v Speaker 1>That would be the issue. Yes, Seattle, by the way,

0:53:26.400 --> 0:53:28.960
<v Speaker 1>the worst team in terms of giving up runs first five.

0:53:29.320 --> 0:53:33.040
<v Speaker 1>The Mariners have given up three point six runs per

0:53:33.320 --> 0:53:35.360
<v Speaker 1>first five this year. So we talked about how the

0:53:35.440 --> 0:53:39.080
<v Speaker 1>Dodgers are basically making the opposing offenses worse than the Giants.

0:53:39.800 --> 0:53:42.920
<v Speaker 1>The Mariners are making opposing offenses better than the Twins

0:53:43.360 --> 0:53:46.359
<v Speaker 1>first five. Baltimore right behind them, giving up three point

0:53:46.440 --> 0:53:48.640
<v Speaker 1>five one runs per first five thus far this year.

0:53:49.120 --> 0:53:51.480
<v Speaker 1>The Chai Socks and Giants right behind them three point

0:53:51.520 --> 0:53:54.160
<v Speaker 1>two nine and three point two four respectively. By the way,

0:53:54.239 --> 0:53:56.319
<v Speaker 1>the Blue Jays rounding out the top five three point

0:53:56.400 --> 0:53:59.520
<v Speaker 1>one nine, so that Giants and Blue Jays basically show

0:53:59.600 --> 0:54:03.760
<v Speaker 1>up add in every category we've discussed today, just terrible,

0:54:04.040 --> 0:54:08.239
<v Speaker 1>whether raw records, raw numbers, or betting numbers. Giants and

0:54:08.280 --> 0:54:11.560
<v Speaker 1>Blue Jays just the worst of the worst. Noteworthy that

0:54:11.680 --> 0:54:14.840
<v Speaker 1>the Marlins are not in that category, typically because the

0:54:14.920 --> 0:54:17.680
<v Speaker 1>Marlins are getting so much bang for their buck when

0:54:17.719 --> 0:54:20.800
<v Speaker 1>they win that they tend to get relieved of this

0:54:21.320 --> 0:54:27.400
<v Speaker 1>horrific um horrific uh sort of notes in terms of

0:54:27.440 --> 0:54:29.000
<v Speaker 1>being at the bottom of all of these lists, and

0:54:29.080 --> 0:54:30.880
<v Speaker 1>it might also look a little different with them if

0:54:30.960 --> 0:54:32.960
<v Speaker 1>we were doing this a few weeks ago. That's right,

0:54:33.120 --> 0:54:34.640
<v Speaker 1>we just happened to do it. That's a good point.

0:54:34.719 --> 0:54:36.440
<v Speaker 1>We just happened to be doing it right when the

0:54:36.520 --> 0:54:39.120
<v Speaker 1>first team is rounding the bend here at the halfway mark,

0:54:39.239 --> 0:54:41.719
<v Speaker 1>that's specifically being the Mariners. So those are your first

0:54:41.800 --> 0:54:44.920
<v Speaker 1>five inning stats, both to the good and to the bad. Again,

0:54:45.480 --> 0:54:49.360
<v Speaker 1>what what of this can we can we feel its sustainable?

0:54:49.480 --> 0:54:51.960
<v Speaker 1>I think the Dodgers is absolutely sustainable. I don't think

0:54:51.960 --> 0:54:53.640
<v Speaker 1>there's any question about that. I think the Yankees and

0:54:53.680 --> 0:54:56.919
<v Speaker 1>the Rangers are Rangers because of that offense and because

0:54:56.960 --> 0:55:00.040
<v Speaker 1>of that ballpark, and the Giants and Blue Jays of

0:55:00.120 --> 0:55:03.120
<v Speaker 1>the bad. I mean, could you could make the case

0:55:03.160 --> 0:55:05.040
<v Speaker 1>the Blue Jays might get better, But I'm not so sure.

0:55:05.400 --> 0:55:08.440
<v Speaker 1>You're not a believer of the Twins. I just I

0:55:08.560 --> 0:55:10.560
<v Speaker 1>think the Twins are good. I just don't think they

0:55:10.640 --> 0:55:12.520
<v Speaker 1>can sustain what they were doing. And we've already seen

0:55:12.600 --> 0:55:16.439
<v Speaker 1>some aggression on that already. Um, I think they'll still

0:55:16.480 --> 0:55:18.600
<v Speaker 1>be good, But I'm just saying with those offenses, the

0:55:18.640 --> 0:55:21.439
<v Speaker 1>Yankees and the Rangers, and conversely the Giants and Blue

0:55:21.480 --> 0:55:24.759
<v Speaker 1>Jays that to those, to me, seem more sustainable than ever. Yeah,

0:55:24.800 --> 0:55:26.480
<v Speaker 1>I agree with you. It's it's it doesn't seem like

0:55:26.520 --> 0:55:28.719
<v Speaker 1>the Giants and blue Jays are gonna be going far

0:55:29.160 --> 0:55:31.880
<v Speaker 1>from where they're at on this list. Interesting to look

0:55:31.920 --> 0:55:34.200
<v Speaker 1>at again. Thanks to Joe Osborne filling in for our

0:55:34.280 --> 0:55:37.600
<v Speaker 1>on side sports guys on the first five just updated

0:55:37.719 --> 0:55:40.919
<v Speaker 1>through the weekend to the very moment. We'll come back

0:55:41.440 --> 0:55:43.680
<v Speaker 1>and we will give first inning stats. Now, these are

0:55:43.719 --> 0:55:46.360
<v Speaker 1>completely proprietary to this show. You will not hear or

0:55:46.440 --> 0:55:49.319
<v Speaker 1>find these anywhere else. There's something that I call through

0:55:49.360 --> 0:55:52.280
<v Speaker 1>the years, a lot of us want to bet first innings.

0:55:52.600 --> 0:55:54.600
<v Speaker 1>We have been betting first innings, yes and no, on

0:55:54.760 --> 0:55:56.960
<v Speaker 1>this show for years and on the podcast for years.

0:55:57.120 --> 0:55:59.160
<v Speaker 1>I know everybody's just sort of discovering it this year,

0:55:59.480 --> 0:56:01.960
<v Speaker 1>but we of uh, we've sort of been tracking this

0:56:02.120 --> 0:56:03.960
<v Speaker 1>for years, and uh, I want to get into the

0:56:04.040 --> 0:56:06.080
<v Speaker 1>pictures that show up the best in the first innings

0:56:06.120 --> 0:56:08.200
<v Speaker 1>thus far this year and the pictures that show up

0:56:08.320 --> 0:56:10.879
<v Speaker 1>worst in the first frame. And then later on the show,

0:56:11.000 --> 0:56:13.680
<v Speaker 1>Jason wine Garten himself hopefully with some first inning bets,

0:56:13.719 --> 0:56:16.160
<v Speaker 1>we'll see what bets he wants to make on today's

0:56:16.160 --> 0:56:18.920
<v Speaker 1>slate coming up QT derivatives MLB Right here on the

0:56:19.000 --> 0:56:21.640
<v Speaker 1>Numbers game at Visa down Back to a numbers game

0:56:21.680 --> 0:56:24.960
<v Speaker 1>with your host, Gil Alexander, broadcasting live from our visa

0:56:25.000 --> 0:56:28.160
<v Speaker 1>in studios in Las Vegas. Board tweets at beating the book.

0:56:28.160 --> 0:56:31.560
<v Speaker 1>Always appreciate the feedback. Uh Godfather seven oh two. As

0:56:31.680 --> 0:56:33.960
<v Speaker 1>Nick Bogdanovitch says, to bet baseball, you need to be

0:56:34.080 --> 0:56:37.000
<v Speaker 1>sick and hate yourself. As Nick Bogdanovitch also says, to

0:56:37.080 --> 0:56:40.280
<v Speaker 1>bet baseball you need whiskey and a revolver. There's no question,

0:56:40.520 --> 0:56:42.960
<v Speaker 1>true words that've never been spoken. And I was on

0:56:43.040 --> 0:56:44.879
<v Speaker 1>the right side of it last No, not the right side,

0:56:44.920 --> 0:56:46.480
<v Speaker 1>but the winning side of it last night. And I

0:56:46.600 --> 0:56:49.200
<v Speaker 1>believe me, I wanted to hug the under betters for

0:56:49.239 --> 0:56:52.120
<v Speaker 1>that Angels Cardinal Sunday night game. This from jet Ware three.

0:56:52.160 --> 0:56:54.560
<v Speaker 1>Gil loved the Q two derivative show. Oh We're not

0:56:54.680 --> 0:56:57.759
<v Speaker 1>done yet jet with the Giants first five so off

0:56:57.800 --> 0:57:00.400
<v Speaker 1>the mark already twenty units. What's your thoughts on a

0:57:00.480 --> 0:57:04.280
<v Speaker 1>daily fade? Well, I don't I don't advocate anything auto

0:57:04.400 --> 0:57:08.920
<v Speaker 1>fade or auto back, but it's always something to consider,

0:57:09.080 --> 0:57:10.840
<v Speaker 1>of course, based on price. You gotta look at it

0:57:10.920 --> 0:57:14.279
<v Speaker 1>like you do anything. But yeah, I mean the thing

0:57:14.360 --> 0:57:17.200
<v Speaker 1>about this show today is there have definitely been consistent

0:57:17.320 --> 0:57:20.160
<v Speaker 1>themes with teams to the point where where it's been

0:57:20.320 --> 0:57:23.400
<v Speaker 1>really really consistent. I don't remember it ever quite being

0:57:24.120 --> 0:57:26.040
<v Speaker 1>that consistent across the board on a Q two, but

0:57:26.200 --> 0:57:29.160
<v Speaker 1>it certainly was today. Uh, this is BH buying is

0:57:29.200 --> 0:57:32.920
<v Speaker 1>your Is your buddy e active on Twitter posting info

0:57:33.080 --> 0:57:36.920
<v Speaker 1>for dumbasses like myself? Or does he remain in the

0:57:37.080 --> 0:57:41.960
<v Speaker 1>shadows unlike one of your shows guests who is like,

0:57:42.200 --> 0:57:43.960
<v Speaker 1>look at me. I don't know what he's referring to.

0:57:44.040 --> 0:57:49.040
<v Speaker 1>He's taking a shot at something. He's taking a shot

0:57:49.080 --> 0:57:51.040
<v Speaker 1>at one of somebody else that I have. I don't know.

0:57:51.440 --> 0:57:53.640
<v Speaker 1>I don't know who that is. Uh five times, rich Gil,

0:57:53.680 --> 0:57:55.200
<v Speaker 1>what's your best guests that it would take to get

0:57:55.240 --> 0:57:56.960
<v Speaker 1>your buddy to do a guest segment on your show?

0:57:57.400 --> 0:57:59.680
<v Speaker 1>Slim to none, He will not come on the show,

0:57:59.800 --> 0:58:02.560
<v Speaker 1>do your off. I I've heard it from from Afar

0:58:02.720 --> 0:58:04.520
<v Speaker 1>and what I've produced. Listen, let me tell you. Let

0:58:04.560 --> 0:58:07.480
<v Speaker 1>me sell somebody not only the most successful sports better

0:58:07.520 --> 0:58:13.080
<v Speaker 1>I know, um, but makes me about twenty times better

0:58:13.160 --> 0:58:15.760
<v Speaker 1>at my job because he's he's always thinking of things

0:58:16.360 --> 0:58:18.520
<v Speaker 1>that I do not think of it necessarily, it's good

0:58:18.560 --> 0:58:20.800
<v Speaker 1>to surround yourself with people like that, which especially when

0:58:20.800 --> 0:58:22.320
<v Speaker 1>you're doing this job. Yeah, I mean no, I think

0:58:22.360 --> 0:58:24.480
<v Speaker 1>anybody who thinks they you know, that they can only

0:58:24.600 --> 0:58:26.520
<v Speaker 1>you know, being a vacuum and and think they could

0:58:26.520 --> 0:58:29.200
<v Speaker 1>cover every ground. No, No, I think our just our

0:58:29.320 --> 0:58:32.240
<v Speaker 1>text exchanges three ways. By the way, with Chris Felik

0:58:32.360 --> 0:58:35.240
<v Speaker 1>on text that it just makes you that much more,

0:58:35.800 --> 0:58:37.800
<v Speaker 1>your antennas are raised that much more. But no, he

0:58:37.800 --> 0:58:40.560
<v Speaker 1>will not come on the show. I get it. Let

0:58:40.600 --> 0:58:43.360
<v Speaker 1>me get it. Maybe one day, remember our final day

0:58:43.400 --> 0:58:48.880
<v Speaker 1>ever on this show. Maybe for three you know, it's

0:58:48.920 --> 0:58:51.480
<v Speaker 1>the end of Gil he's on today. All right, let's

0:58:51.600 --> 0:58:54.520
<v Speaker 1>conclude the Q two derivatives with first inning stats. Now

0:58:54.560 --> 0:58:55.960
<v Speaker 1>we've been betting these on this show and on the

0:58:56.000 --> 0:58:58.960
<v Speaker 1>podcast for many many years. Let me start with and

0:58:59.080 --> 0:59:02.600
<v Speaker 1>this is really I get to what if this is narrative?

0:59:02.840 --> 0:59:05.560
<v Speaker 1>What of this is actually predictive? So this from our

0:59:05.560 --> 0:59:08.280
<v Speaker 1>buddies over at team rankings again, Tom Federico and company

0:59:08.320 --> 0:59:10.880
<v Speaker 1>over there at team rankings. These are just the percentage

0:59:11.440 --> 0:59:14.680
<v Speaker 1>first inning scoring percentages. So this is the percentage of

0:59:14.760 --> 0:59:16.800
<v Speaker 1>time that a team has actually played it at least

0:59:16.840 --> 0:59:19.640
<v Speaker 1>a run in first innings thus far this year, and

0:59:19.720 --> 0:59:21.640
<v Speaker 1>again talk about the themes that we're talking about earlier.

0:59:21.680 --> 0:59:24.800
<v Speaker 1>The Texas Rangers have played in a run thirty eight

0:59:24.880 --> 0:59:26.919
<v Speaker 1>point four six percent of the time and first innings

0:59:26.960 --> 0:59:29.919
<v Speaker 1>thus far this year. Now you say to yourself, maybe

0:59:29.960 --> 0:59:32.240
<v Speaker 1>that means they'll played a run thirty eight point four

0:59:32.280 --> 0:59:33.880
<v Speaker 1>or six percent of the time moving forward, And I

0:59:33.920 --> 0:59:37.680
<v Speaker 1>would say to you, nothing really predictive about them, Just curious,

0:59:37.840 --> 0:59:40.520
<v Speaker 1>just interesting. This stuff is very interesting because I feel

0:59:40.520 --> 0:59:43.240
<v Speaker 1>like it almost produces more questions, you know, like will

0:59:43.320 --> 0:59:45.080
<v Speaker 1>you throw that out that I want to know? Okay,

0:59:45.120 --> 0:59:47.680
<v Speaker 1>so is that where does that rake historically? You know

0:59:47.720 --> 0:59:49.320
<v Speaker 1>what I mean? Well, that's a very good point. It

0:59:49.400 --> 0:59:52.440
<v Speaker 1>ranks pretty highestorically. But here's you know, second places Tampa

0:59:52.480 --> 0:59:54.760
<v Speaker 1>Bay their thirty seven point one eight percent. Now do

0:59:54.800 --> 0:59:56.720
<v Speaker 1>you remember about a month and a month a half

0:59:56.720 --> 0:59:59.160
<v Speaker 1>ago when everybody on this network was going crazy because

0:59:59.200 --> 1:00:01.600
<v Speaker 1>Tampa Bay score. There was always a run scored into

1:00:01.600 --> 1:00:03.520
<v Speaker 1>Tampa Bay first inning. And I sat here on a

1:00:03.600 --> 1:00:06.640
<v Speaker 1>numbers game and I'm like, you're taking people off the scent,

1:00:06.920 --> 1:00:09.040
<v Speaker 1>like there is no predictive nature to it, because you

1:00:09.120 --> 1:00:11.840
<v Speaker 1>know what, no one can possibly sustain that. And sure

1:00:11.960 --> 1:00:14.240
<v Speaker 1>enough the rays and first inning and you hear nobody

1:00:14.320 --> 1:00:16.880
<v Speaker 1>talking about it anymore, like it never happened. So I

1:00:16.960 --> 1:00:19.320
<v Speaker 1>think we we can't be prisoners of the moment on

1:00:19.480 --> 1:00:21.840
<v Speaker 1>this stuff. And so just you know, just for interest sake,

1:00:22.720 --> 1:00:25.320
<v Speaker 1>for another example of that, everybody on this second network

1:00:25.400 --> 1:00:27.520
<v Speaker 1>is talking about Gito, so I think there's a bet

1:00:27.640 --> 1:00:30.240
<v Speaker 1>on him every time he starts on this network. Well,

1:00:30.280 --> 1:00:32.400
<v Speaker 1>people have done very well betting on Julie. And I'm

1:00:32.400 --> 1:00:34.720
<v Speaker 1>not I'm not saying it to to in any way

1:00:34.760 --> 1:00:36.840
<v Speaker 1>to sparage anybody. I'm just saying, in the case of

1:00:36.960 --> 1:00:38.760
<v Speaker 1>first innings, for those of us who have done this

1:00:38.840 --> 1:00:41.800
<v Speaker 1>for years and years and years, not exactly what we're

1:00:41.840 --> 1:00:43.560
<v Speaker 1>supposed to look at. But for the purposes of this show,

1:00:43.600 --> 1:00:45.840
<v Speaker 1>I just want to point out some numbers. Milwaukee and

1:00:45.880 --> 1:00:49.040
<v Speaker 1>Tampa Bay both at thirty seven point one, uh playing

1:00:49.120 --> 1:00:50.800
<v Speaker 1>runs in the first inning thus far this year. By

1:00:50.840 --> 1:00:52.520
<v Speaker 1>the way, just to give you an idea how ridiculous

1:00:52.560 --> 1:00:55.520
<v Speaker 1>it is. Guess who fourth places in terms of reliability

1:00:55.560 --> 1:00:57.920
<v Speaker 1>of scoring a run in the first inning. Is this

1:00:58.040 --> 1:01:01.720
<v Speaker 1>back to the Marlins again, Baltimore thirty five point nine

1:01:01.760 --> 1:01:03.320
<v Speaker 1>percent of the time they score a run in the

1:01:03.440 --> 1:01:07.080
<v Speaker 1>first inning. By the way, the worst San Francisco Giants

1:01:07.120 --> 1:01:10.160
<v Speaker 1>take another bow. Yeah, there's another list to put them

1:01:10.240 --> 1:01:13.760
<v Speaker 1>up on. Fifteen point seven nine percent of the time.

1:01:14.000 --> 1:01:18.280
<v Speaker 1>That's all fifteen, so three out of three out of

1:01:18.360 --> 1:01:21.760
<v Speaker 1>every uh twenty times they score a run in the

1:01:21.840 --> 1:01:26.000
<v Speaker 1>first inning. Basically, Miami Marlins second worst. Only eighteen point

1:01:26.040 --> 1:01:27.760
<v Speaker 1>four two percent of the time do they score run.

1:01:27.960 --> 1:01:30.920
<v Speaker 1>Oakland Athletics two percent of the time. By the way,

1:01:30.960 --> 1:01:33.680
<v Speaker 1>we could go and look at first inning score prevention

1:01:33.760 --> 1:01:35.920
<v Speaker 1>and do the same exercise, but I don't want to.

1:01:35.960 --> 1:01:37.760
<v Speaker 1>I don't want to take you off anymore sense, So

1:01:37.840 --> 1:01:40.680
<v Speaker 1>we'll just we'll leave that to the back burner. These

1:01:40.720 --> 1:01:43.800
<v Speaker 1>are proprietary stats. Now. These are starting pitchers thus far

1:01:43.920 --> 1:01:46.320
<v Speaker 1>in the in the major leagues thus far this year,

1:01:47.040 --> 1:01:51.880
<v Speaker 1>minimum fifty plate appearances faced. All right, So I said

1:01:51.920 --> 1:01:55.160
<v Speaker 1>A said a bar there that they had to have

1:01:55.520 --> 1:01:59.880
<v Speaker 1>faced at least fifty different plate appearances of opposing batters.

1:02:00.400 --> 1:02:04.240
<v Speaker 1>Who are excuse me, Kelly, who are the worst pictures

1:02:04.360 --> 1:02:06.560
<v Speaker 1>thus far this year in first innings? For whatever reason?

1:02:07.320 --> 1:02:12.240
<v Speaker 1>Who are the worst? If I gave you forty guesses,

1:02:12.280 --> 1:02:15.720
<v Speaker 1>would you guess the worst? I could not name any

1:02:15.760 --> 1:02:17.640
<v Speaker 1>of these guys I can tell you about. I think

1:02:17.640 --> 1:02:20.040
<v Speaker 1>I could name twenty pictures of baseball right now. So

1:02:20.120 --> 1:02:23.560
<v Speaker 1>you're asking the wrong guy, Gil, Maybe I am uh.

1:02:23.760 --> 1:02:26.800
<v Speaker 1>This gentleman was was most noteworthy this weekend for being

1:02:26.920 --> 1:02:30.640
<v Speaker 1>very mouthy in the Mets locker room in the Mets clubhouse.

1:02:31.200 --> 1:02:35.080
<v Speaker 1>Jason Vargas the worst. But we're talking about through the

1:02:35.080 --> 1:02:39.680
<v Speaker 1>prism of of opposing on base percentage. Now in first innings,

1:02:40.120 --> 1:02:43.160
<v Speaker 1>Jason Vargas is the worst starting pitcher in all of

1:02:43.200 --> 1:02:47.480
<v Speaker 1>baseball first innings along with Michael Walker of the Cardinals.

1:02:47.880 --> 1:02:51.600
<v Speaker 1>The both of them tied opposing batters first innings thus

1:02:51.640 --> 1:02:54.760
<v Speaker 1>far this year minimum fifty plate appearances faced. They are

1:02:54.800 --> 1:02:59.480
<v Speaker 1>allowing a four twenty one on base percentage opposing batters

1:03:00.280 --> 1:03:03.560
<v Speaker 1>Vargas and Waka. That's really interesting because obviously, when we

1:03:03.600 --> 1:03:05.880
<v Speaker 1>talk about pictures, you're talking about you know, the first

1:03:05.960 --> 1:03:09.080
<v Speaker 1>time through the lineup, you should be the most successful, right,

1:03:09.160 --> 1:03:12.120
<v Speaker 1>So it's it's tough, I guess, to think that you're

1:03:12.160 --> 1:03:14.040
<v Speaker 1>the worst at that in the league. It is, but

1:03:14.120 --> 1:03:16.800
<v Speaker 1>it is top of order, right, So there's that. But

1:03:16.920 --> 1:03:18.800
<v Speaker 1>You're right, it's first time through, but it is top

1:03:18.840 --> 1:03:20.800
<v Speaker 1>of order. By the way, Waka giving up a three

1:03:20.880 --> 1:03:23.920
<v Speaker 1>eight batting average first inning, so he's just getting he's

1:03:23.920 --> 1:03:27.560
<v Speaker 1>just getting raked um Drew palmerans in terms of on

1:03:27.640 --> 1:03:31.840
<v Speaker 1>base percentage, next worst for fifteen Antonio sents a tela

1:03:32.000 --> 1:03:35.800
<v Speaker 1>for fourteen on base percentage for opposing batters Kyle Freeland

1:03:35.840 --> 1:03:41.120
<v Speaker 1>his teammate there or one time teammate on base percentage

1:03:41.160 --> 1:03:45.360
<v Speaker 1>allowed You say Cokuchi from the Mariners, the rookie right

1:03:45.360 --> 1:03:46.959
<v Speaker 1>after that four hundred. By the way, you know who's

1:03:46.960 --> 1:03:49.520
<v Speaker 1>giving up a four hundred on base percentage? Tied with

1:03:49.720 --> 1:03:54.760
<v Speaker 1>you say Cakuchi, Lucas gi Alito. First inning. We have

1:03:54.920 --> 1:03:57.840
<v Speaker 1>found a category where Gilto is not doing well this year.

1:03:57.960 --> 1:04:02.160
<v Speaker 1>The first inning is not so much. So keep that

1:04:02.240 --> 1:04:05.640
<v Speaker 1>in mind with Gelato opposing batters. Four hundred on base

1:04:05.680 --> 1:04:08.280
<v Speaker 1>percentage first innings for Geolto. So that's interesting to look

1:04:08.320 --> 1:04:10.280
<v Speaker 1>at through that prison. Now, who have been the best

1:04:10.400 --> 1:04:13.440
<v Speaker 1>in first innings thus far this year? I mean, I

1:04:13.480 --> 1:04:15.680
<v Speaker 1>would think some of the aces that that now that

1:04:15.760 --> 1:04:18.480
<v Speaker 1>we're talking about that, so I don't know, I mean Kershaw,

1:04:18.640 --> 1:04:20.440
<v Speaker 1>I mean, well, I guess we just said Gelto is

1:04:20.480 --> 1:04:22.920
<v Speaker 1>on the other side, so maybe not. Well, you are corrected.

1:04:23.840 --> 1:04:26.880
<v Speaker 1>It is primarily aces. Uh. The single greatest though, is

1:04:26.920 --> 1:04:30.280
<v Speaker 1>Michael Pineda of Twin Wow. Okay, that surprises me a bit.

1:04:30.520 --> 1:04:33.640
<v Speaker 1>Fifty one plate appearances by opposing batters. He's only giving

1:04:33.720 --> 1:04:37.040
<v Speaker 1>up a one eighty five on base percentage for posing batters.

1:04:37.560 --> 1:04:41.280
<v Speaker 1>But then it is a sort of aces up there right. Well, no,

1:04:41.360 --> 1:04:44.920
<v Speaker 1>it's Bueller, his teammate walk Buller, who I still consider

1:04:44.960 --> 1:04:46.640
<v Speaker 1>the ace of the staff even though he was doing

1:04:47.880 --> 1:04:49.440
<v Speaker 1>this a seven time I brought up a ball, but

1:04:49.520 --> 1:04:51.440
<v Speaker 1>he said that this weekend he'd take Walker Bueller in

1:04:51.520 --> 1:04:54.520
<v Speaker 1>one game over you. Oh no doubt A Mall is

1:04:54.520 --> 1:04:56.200
<v Speaker 1>getting a lot of juice on this show to because

1:04:56.280 --> 1:04:58.439
<v Speaker 1>I didn't think I've mentioned it this anytime. They checking

1:04:58.480 --> 1:05:01.760
<v Speaker 1>the minute from a mone Walker Bueller second best too

1:05:01.840 --> 1:05:05.840
<v Speaker 1>oh four on base percentage allowed opposing batters like talking

1:05:05.840 --> 1:05:08.919
<v Speaker 1>about them all on the show. Jacob Degram third, third

1:05:09.000 --> 1:05:12.840
<v Speaker 1>best two oh seven on base percentage allowed opposing batters,

1:05:13.080 --> 1:05:17.560
<v Speaker 1>Chris Sale to ten opposing batters on base allowed. So

1:05:17.680 --> 1:05:21.160
<v Speaker 1>first innings they've been great Panada Bueller, de Graham Sale

1:05:22.080 --> 1:05:25.680
<v Speaker 1>top four. Uh, Frankie Mantas, who will no longer be

1:05:25.760 --> 1:05:28.320
<v Speaker 1>with us for Adie games. He why the way, also

1:05:28.400 --> 1:05:31.840
<v Speaker 1>showed up in the top ten. It should be noted, well,

1:05:32.800 --> 1:05:34.880
<v Speaker 1>whatever he was taken was working out for him, at

1:05:34.920 --> 1:05:37.680
<v Speaker 1>least in the first innings. UM, so that's interesting. Again,

1:05:37.800 --> 1:05:40.840
<v Speaker 1>those are those are how starting pitchers have performed. Those

1:05:40.840 --> 1:05:43.840
<v Speaker 1>are proprietary statue won't find those anywhere else. Who has

1:05:43.920 --> 1:05:46.320
<v Speaker 1>been the best? Who has been the worst in terms

1:05:46.360 --> 1:05:48.480
<v Speaker 1>of first inning performance thus far this year? Now? To

1:05:48.600 --> 1:05:52.640
<v Speaker 1>what extent should that inform your first inning bets? I

1:05:52.720 --> 1:05:55.480
<v Speaker 1>have famously come on this show now for more than

1:05:55.520 --> 1:05:58.080
<v Speaker 1>two years and said it's the one thing. Although I

1:05:58.120 --> 1:05:59.760
<v Speaker 1>guess I said something in tennis I wasn't willing to

1:05:59.760 --> 1:06:02.040
<v Speaker 1>talk abut last night this had typically been the one

1:06:02.080 --> 1:06:04.400
<v Speaker 1>thing I wasn't willing to talk about. And I'm still

1:06:04.480 --> 1:06:07.200
<v Speaker 1>not willing to talk about how we bet first innings.

1:06:07.480 --> 1:06:10.360
<v Speaker 1>And let's just say what I've mapped out for you.

1:06:11.240 --> 1:06:15.040
<v Speaker 1>Maybe not the most important thing in the equation, but

1:06:15.200 --> 1:06:19.160
<v Speaker 1>interesting none the less. Okay, but interesting Nonetheless, As I

1:06:19.240 --> 1:06:22.120
<v Speaker 1>popped the mic with the all this stuff, it's very

1:06:22.200 --> 1:06:25.320
<v Speaker 1>it's it's very interesting, I think, especially we're taking deep

1:06:25.400 --> 1:06:28.080
<v Speaker 1>looks at it like we are today. But you're right,

1:06:28.160 --> 1:06:30.200
<v Speaker 1>take take with a great assault, right, you know, don't

1:06:30.240 --> 1:06:32.480
<v Speaker 1>desire you're betting around it? Well, I think, But I

1:06:32.520 --> 1:06:34.280
<v Speaker 1>think when we look back on this entire show, I

1:06:34.360 --> 1:06:36.800
<v Speaker 1>think the key to all of it has been And yes,

1:06:36.840 --> 1:06:38.160
<v Speaker 1>we can take from the first innings, I think we

1:06:38.200 --> 1:06:40.640
<v Speaker 1>can take a nugget or two for sure. But the

1:06:40.760 --> 1:06:44.520
<v Speaker 1>consistency with with with with which the Rangers and the Yankees,

1:06:44.840 --> 1:06:47.320
<v Speaker 1>teams like that came up on top the Dodgers, and

1:06:47.440 --> 1:06:50.760
<v Speaker 1>the consistency with which the Blue Jays and the Giants

1:06:51.240 --> 1:06:55.280
<v Speaker 1>like they are just bereft of any betting. Like after

1:06:55.360 --> 1:06:58.160
<v Speaker 1>you hear a show like this, can you, under any

1:06:58.240 --> 1:07:00.920
<v Speaker 1>circumstance put money behind the Giant Blue Jays on any

1:07:00.920 --> 1:07:03.640
<v Speaker 1>given day? You have you have absolutely schooled the that

1:07:03.680 --> 1:07:05.280
<v Speaker 1>I that will depute doing that for the rest of

1:07:05.320 --> 1:07:06.720
<v Speaker 1>the season, at least for the rest of the quarter,

1:07:06.800 --> 1:07:08.640
<v Speaker 1>at least for the rest of the Baseball betting is

1:07:08.680 --> 1:07:10.800
<v Speaker 1>hard enough, as we've documented so many times on this

1:07:10.880 --> 1:07:13.200
<v Speaker 1>show too. For you to go through the experience of

1:07:13.240 --> 1:07:15.880
<v Speaker 1>betting on those teams, what are you doing? It's it

1:07:16.080 --> 1:07:18.560
<v Speaker 1>is It is crazy to see how just what you

1:07:18.640 --> 1:07:21.120
<v Speaker 1>talked about how many times a couple of these teams

1:07:21.160 --> 1:07:23.880
<v Speaker 1>have ended up on every single graphic with it. Think

1:07:23.960 --> 1:07:25.960
<v Speaker 1>that we've talked about now. Listen, No, no one has

1:07:26.000 --> 1:07:27.920
<v Speaker 1>bet baseball. I'm sure there has been some people, but

1:07:28.280 --> 1:07:31.760
<v Speaker 1>I've bet baseball for for decades. I did it through

1:07:31.840 --> 1:07:34.840
<v Speaker 1>predicted modeling. So listen, I understand it's all dependent on price.

1:07:34.960 --> 1:07:37.080
<v Speaker 1>Value is value. I get it more than any you know,

1:07:37.200 --> 1:07:41.680
<v Speaker 1>as much as anybody. But sometimes teams are just that

1:07:41.840 --> 1:07:45.160
<v Speaker 1>bad where even the prices the market's given them, you know,

1:07:45.240 --> 1:07:46.880
<v Speaker 1>it's it's one of these things where we talked about

1:07:46.880 --> 1:07:48.919
<v Speaker 1>the beginning of last year, the chasm between the halves

1:07:48.960 --> 1:07:51.560
<v Speaker 1>and the half nots has gotten so wide that even

1:07:51.640 --> 1:07:54.840
<v Speaker 1>when your model shows value on the Orioles and the

1:07:54.960 --> 1:07:58.080
<v Speaker 1>blue Jays and the giants, even when there should trigger

1:07:58.120 --> 1:08:00.720
<v Speaker 1>a bet, right and you're like, oh, hey, look these

1:08:00.760 --> 1:08:03.880
<v Speaker 1>teams are plus two fifty, uh and I have them

1:08:03.920 --> 1:08:05.960
<v Speaker 1>at plus two hundred, Well I should make a bet

1:08:06.040 --> 1:08:09.200
<v Speaker 1>on them. Yeah. I just don't know if you should

1:08:09.320 --> 1:08:12.880
<v Speaker 1>just blindly bet your model anymore with some of these teams.

1:08:12.960 --> 1:08:15.760
<v Speaker 1>That's the point of all this. It's like, I get it,

1:08:16.120 --> 1:08:18.600
<v Speaker 1>your model says one thing but can we have a

1:08:18.640 --> 1:08:21.880
<v Speaker 1>little humility with your model because these teams are just

1:08:22.120 --> 1:08:24.320
<v Speaker 1>that bad it all say, you know, I mean, you know,

1:08:24.360 --> 1:08:28.040
<v Speaker 1>I used to bet baseball more heavily. I've gotten away

1:08:28.080 --> 1:08:30.200
<v Speaker 1>from it, one of those ballendio guys. I'm sorry, I've

1:08:30.200 --> 1:08:32.600
<v Speaker 1>got more into CFL and stuff like that. It's just

1:08:33.800 --> 1:08:36.760
<v Speaker 1>tortures me a little bit. But you know, beginning of

1:08:36.800 --> 1:08:38.960
<v Speaker 1>the season, I felt like I would seeing numbers that

1:08:39.080 --> 1:08:41.840
<v Speaker 1>I never saw five years ago, and did consistency that

1:08:41.920 --> 1:08:45.040
<v Speaker 1>we were seeing teams at plus two eighty two ninety

1:08:45.120 --> 1:08:48.200
<v Speaker 1>three hundred. It suckered me into bet on other orioles

1:08:48.240 --> 1:08:50.240
<v Speaker 1>a couple of times. I'm like, you know, it's the

1:08:50.280 --> 1:08:53.519
<v Speaker 1>two weeks into the season, I'm getting plus three dollars, okay,

1:08:53.760 --> 1:08:55.599
<v Speaker 1>And what did they just shot? And what this show

1:08:55.640 --> 1:08:57.760
<v Speaker 1>has shown at least through the first two quarters of

1:08:57.800 --> 1:09:00.800
<v Speaker 1>the season, at least through the first half or take

1:09:00.840 --> 1:09:04.400
<v Speaker 1>it two games that even even doing that, um, it

1:09:04.560 --> 1:09:07.320
<v Speaker 1>is not a winning proposition. In fact, you will hemorrhage money.

1:09:07.920 --> 1:09:10.479
<v Speaker 1>Will it be the case moving forward? Well that's for

1:09:10.600 --> 1:09:12.679
<v Speaker 1>us to determine. It's just a sort of a cautionary note,

1:09:12.720 --> 1:09:14.560
<v Speaker 1>if you will, from all of us here in the

1:09:14.600 --> 1:09:16.640
<v Speaker 1>numbers game that visa full p s A from all

1:09:16.640 --> 1:09:18.280
<v Speaker 1>of us when we talk baseball.