are these two cases where the books know better than recent results and market perception?
my assumption here (not sure if true) is that bettors would be more inclined to bet the dogs in each of these games (Cards +170 and Reds +165 respectively) rather than the faves. so are books baiting people to take the dogs here at these attractive prices?
of course the Cards aren't very good on the whole but Gant has been a pretty solid starter for them this year outside of a couple performances and overall their staff is more reliable than the Braves. and who would be eager to bet Morton at -185 regardless of opponent, especially considering how poor the Braves' pen has been?
the Braves do remain at home here, are coming off a couple tough losses against the Red Sox, and do have the more reliable offense so perhaps this is a good bounce back spot for them? while the Cards are coming off a home sweep against the Marlins which were all very tight low scoring games that could've gone either way.
as for the Reds/Pads game, everyone knows how much of a slump the Pads are in and they just got swept in Colorado. whereas the Reds have been extremely hot going 11-2 in their last 13 including an impressive sweep at Milwaukee. needless to say.. on the surface, this is another situation of "2 teams going in opposite directions" yet here the Pads sit as -179 chalk tonight. it's Miley vs. Musgrove so the pitching is fairly even on the whole while the Reds' bats have been far more potent than the Pads.
i guess what i'm wondering here is why are linesmakers so confident the Braves and Pads are the right sides tonight?