Jake's "Battle Back from 20 Down" Plays - MLB Saturday April 21st

Record: 47-61
Profit: -16.8

Predicted Lines:

Det -150, U8.5 -112
Mets -145, U8 -123
KC -120, 9 Pk
Boston -140, 9.5 Pk
SF -170, U7.5 -115

Bets:

New York Mets -125
Pitchers: Perez/James

Braves haven't hit lefties well this year and the Mets are just killing em. Braves haven't had a good bullpen this year and the Mets are just dominating from the pen. Perez dominated the Braves once this season already and although he totally lost his control his last start, I think he's a good bet to do well as he already has confidence he can beat the Braves. -125 at home is a nice deal.

Kansas City Royals +100
Pitchers: Greinke/Bonser

Greinke came out unhittable and then could not get it together last time out. He's had some mental things in the past and it was his first start after some family members passed and that very well may have contributed to his mind being off the game. Minnesota has some injuries and they will likely be without some of the big names in their lineup. As always, KC's bullpen may screw me but with Bonser pitching poorly and KC's ability to hit at home, I'd have to be crazy to pass on this one.

New York Yankees +145
Pitchers: Beckett/Karstens

Beckett was only so-so against the Yankees last year and although he is dealing now, I don't really think there is a pitcher in the majors that can consistently limit this Yankees lineup the way they are clubbin. Karstens put in quality innings last year and has looked very good in the minors during his rehab starts. Boston's offense is still not going as well as they can and I think the Yanks and their bats are a very live dog here.

San Francisco Giants -146
San Fran/Arizona Under 8.5 +100
Pitchers: Zito/Gonzalez

Zito is a scary pitcher to bet on but the Diamondbacks can't touch lefties right now and they are going from their usual hitters' park to a place that isn't easy to hit. Zito dominated this team twice last year and I think there is a very good chance the DBacks look as confused as Paris Hilton tying her shoes. Gonzalez is no joke and usually puts in quality innings. His problem is giving up the long ball but SF plays in a pretty big park that isn't easy to knock em out. This one seems like 3-1 or 4-2 Giants, but I'll play the ML instead of the RL just to be safe.

More plays coming in the AM.

Jake, is the "teams can't hit lefties" or "teams tee off on righties" thing very accurate? I notice that publications like Winning Points hang their entire capping on that angle. I also noticed from experience that they were usually wrong to do that over the long haul, and got their asses handed to them capping exclusively on that angle. It makes sense, as what MLB team in their right mind would want their every day lineup to only be able to hit lefty or rightie pitchers. I would think that they would aim for as much hitting balance on the roster as possible, and any serious bias in the statistics would even out over the long haul. Just a thought.

ppeter said:

Jake, is the "teams can't hit lefties" or "teams tee off on righties" thing very accurate? I notice that publications like Winning Points hang their entire capping on that angle. I also noticed from experience that they were usually wrong to do that over the long haul, and got their asses handed to them capping exclusively on that angle. It makes sense, as what MLB team in their right mind would want their every day lineup to only be able to hit lefty or rightie pitchers. I would think that they would aim for as much hitting balance on the roster as possible, and any serious bias in the statistics would even out over the long haul. Just a thought.

Click to expand...

Some teams hit lefties or righties better than others. It's not a blanket statement though as a team could hit .390 versus righties and not be able to touch a knuckler like Wakefield so you gotta be on the lookout for the teams and the pitchers that buck the trend. When I say that that, I'm usually just abbreviating the writeup so I don't get too indepth. It's something to look into but definitely not a point blank, end of discussion thing.