I found a baseball Future bet that I LOVE

[5 star bomb]

First I want to say thanks to Matt23 and give him credit for making the thread about baseball futures. I would have not seen this........

This is currently available at Pinnacle. Not sure where else I havent looked yet, but I will be.


Most Wins by MLB pitcher ?
411 Over 19.5 wins -146
412 Under 19.5 wins +130



OVER 19.5 Wins (-146)

Since 1983 there have only been 2 seasons not including the strike season where a pitcher hasnt reached the 20 win mark. At this price I think its a must to hop on the Over 19.5 wins. This bet is 21-2 the last 23 years. It doesnt get much better than this when it comes to futures imo. I like this even more especially with Johan heading to the Mets. He is a great candidate for 20 wins. Well just thought I would share this bc I was pretty shocked at this. It almost looks too good to be true to me


Here is the 2 seasons where a pitcher failed to reach 20 wins. As you can see they were VERY CLOSE

1995 - Maddux and Mussina 19 wins each

2006 - Santana and Wang 19 wins each

[Matt23]

Good luck with the play 5 Star Bomb.

I jumped the gun a bit and took the under in this prop when I saw the nice + juice on it. Might buy out of it though if I can.

[mofome]

too juicey for me.

[5 star bomb]

too juicey for me.

-146 when 21/23 years it has cashed!?!?

[5 star bomb]

Good luck with the play 5 Star Bomb.

I jumped the gun a bit and took the under in this prop when I saw the nice + juice on it. Might buy out of it though if I can.

Dont let me change your mind Matt. If you really like that under then keep it. I just couldnt believe there has only been 2 years since 1983 where a pitcher hasnt gotten 20 wins. I would have thought it was closer to 50/50

[mofome]

-146 when 21/23 years it has cashed!?!?

read it wrong before, i thought someone posted that santana had to win 20. nvm.

[The HG]

Why then do you suppose Pinnacle's number is so off from what you think it should be? Pinnacle rarely if ever has egregiously wrong lines. Whenever you see something like that your first question should be "So why does this line exist?"

I'm not being rhetorical, I really wonder why. Based on your info it does seem way way off.

[pat venditto]

this is coming from the guy who thinks cavs will be in the finals

[Matt23]

this is coming from the guy who thinks cavs will be in the finals

Despite their pathetic performance, there is value in the Cavs @ +1100 to win the Eastern Conference. Boston is a heavy fav to win it and I do not see them winning it... I believe it will either be Orlando or Cleveland...

[5 star bomb]

Despite their pathetic performance, there is value in the Cavs @ +1100 to win the Eastern Conference. Boston is a heavy fav to win it and I do not see them winning it... I believe it will either be Orlando or Cleveland...

I agree Matt

[mofome]

this is coming from the guy who thinks cavs will be in the finals

no team has ever made the finals without stinking it up a bit before the all star break. good point there.

[5 star bomb]

this is coming from the guy who thinks cavs will be in the finals

Its pointless arguing over this. The Cavs were in the finals last year... They could very easily make it again,end of story

[mofome]

Its pointless arguing over this. The Cavs were in the finals last year... They could very easily make it again,end of story

especially if they deal for Kidd.

[Matt23]

especially if they deal for Kidd.

I never knew they planned on dealing for Kidd, can you confirm this?

[mofome]

I never knew they planned on dealing for Kidd, can you confirm this?

can i confirm? im mofo, i can find anything.

LeBron: Get Kidd, get Cavs NBA title
Posted by Mary Schmitt Boyer January 30, 2008 00:07AM
Categories: Cavaliers

Portland, Ore. -- LeBron James said he hadn't talked to his good friend Jason Kidd on Tuesday, a day after the New Jersey Nets point guard asked to be traded.

James said he hadn't talked to Cavs General Manager Danny Ferry either. He didn't think that was necessary.

"When it gets to a point like that, where you see Jason Kidd wants to be traded, you shouldn't have to go to the front office and tell them to get on it," James said after the Cavs practiced at the Nike headquarters in preparation for tonight's game against the Trail Blazers. "It's Jason Kidd. It's not someone else asking for a trade. It's Jason Kidd. You shouldn't have to go to anybody in the front office for them to be ready to try to jump on it."

James and Kidd have gotten to know each other through practices for the U.S. Olympic team, and the idea of playing together during the regular season is more than a little appealing.

"Like I've been quoted before, I would love to have a guy like Jason Kidd be a part of this franchise," James said. "It would make us that much better of a team if you get a guy like that. Everyone knows how much I love Jason Kidd. . . . It's not hard to see how much I would love to have him play for this team."

James made it perfectly clear where he stood on the matter.

Asked if getting Kidd would mean an NBA championship for the Cavs, James said emphatically: "Yeah. . . . It's that easy."

Kidd's availability became an issue Monday night, when he told ESPN The Magazine's Ric Bucher on ESPN.com: "We tried to make this work. We've found out it doesn't. It's time for us all to move on."

Reporters descended on the Nets' practice facility for Tuesday's shootaround before the Nets' home game against the Milwaukee Bucks, but Kidd did not address the media at that time. He also did not talk to reporters during the open locker room period before the game.

Nets General Manager Rod Thorn admitted Kidd's request, after the point guard repeatedly denied that he wanted to be traded, probably would hinder the Nets' ability to make a deal.

Thorn did indicate a willingness to try and accommodate Kidd, but it won't be easy to trade the soon-to-be-35-year-old who makes $19.7 million this season and $21.3 million next season. Thorn also said he wouldn't make a deal that wasn't advantageous to his team. The Nets likely are seeking young players and veterans with expiring contracts.

The Cavs have the former but not the latter. Although Ferry declined to comment on the trade rumors as is his custom, he is well aware that his team's name will be mentioned every time a prominent point guard becomes available. It was well known the Cavs tried to acquire Sacramento's Mike Bibby last summer, when they also pursued a number of other free-agent point guards. So it only makes sense they'd be mentioned in talks about Kidd and/or Damon Stoudamire, waived Monday by Memphis. There's still unsigned free agent Earl Boykins as well.

So could the Cavs acquire Kidd? The deal certainly would have to appeal to owner Dan Gilbert, who pledged after last year's appearance in the NBA Finals to do whatever was necessary to improve. The Cavs could offer a package including the improving Larry Hughes, with two years left on the five-year, $60 million he signed before the 2005-06 season, plus Drew Gooden, scheduled to make about $6.4 million this year, and Daniel "Boobie" Gibson, who makes less than $700,000.

The injured Sasha Pavlovic, who re-signed with the Cavs on Nov. 1, could be available, but the injured Anderson Varejao would not be available for trade purposes because he will not have been with the Cavs for 90 days before the Feb. 21 trading deadline. In fact, because of Varejao's injury, it's possible the Cavs might have to look to acquire a forward or center before the trading deadline instead of a guard.

No matter what the circumstances, giving away young talent is never easy. However, chances to get players like Kidd don't come along very often either. Whether Thorn would be willing to trade Kidd to an Eastern Conference team is another question, although it's unlikely the rebuilt Nets would be ready to challenge the Cavs before Kidd's contract was up after next season.

http://blog.cleveland.com/sports/2008/01/lebron_get_kidd_get_cavs_nba_t.html

[5 star bomb]

I dont think the Cavs have the pieces that the Nets would be looking for to make the trade happen

[mofome]

I dont think the Cavs have the pieces that the Nets would be looking for to make the trade happen

trading in the nba isnt as easy as it is in the mlb.

[Matt23]

As a Cavs fan, I would love to see them get Kidd..

A Kidd/LeBron back-court would be sick. Look at how many uncontested looks a washed up Vince Carter gets thanks to the passing skills of J-Kidd, imagine what a LeBron James could do getting set up by Kidd..

If this trade gets closer I will drop a few more units on the Cavs to win the east...

[Panic]

Easy money, 5 Star. Johan will cover it for you. I would be suprised if he doesn't win 22 games this year(barring injury). He's gonna be an absolute beast.

[pico]

i remember someone, John or Bill, said USC over 11 is the lock of the year. before the season starts, that seemed like a damn good bet. who would though stanford would win outright.

season props means your money is locked up for 5 months....think about that.

[donjuan]

i remember someone, John or Bill, said USC over 11 is the lock of the year. before the season starts, that seemed like a damn good bet. who would though stanford would win outright.

season props means your money is locked up for 5 months....think about that.

Really? Unders are almost always the ones that have value on RSW totals, not to mention that they had to play at Cal, Oregon, ASU and Nebraska.

[Panic]

Big difference when you got a future that covers the field instead of one team(or one player).

If Johan goes down, he'll have:

1a:Beckett
1a:Wang
1a:Verlander

Ect.........

[Louisvillekid1]

I just hate tying money up for the hole baseball season. . .

[wtt0315]

if santana signs he will have 22 wins easily.

[donjuan]

if santana signs he will have 22 wins easily.

Prop bet up to 1k at even money on O/U 21.5 wins?

[wtt0315]

hmm let me think about it.. we talking about any pict or just santana

[donjuan]

Just Santana of course.

[5 star bomb]

Just Santana of course.

why would he do that if he can get every pitcher in mlb at -146

[treece]

why would he do that if he can get every pitcher in mlb at -146

How do you get to bet this at pinnacle 5 star? You live in Chicago not Canada.

[donjuan]

why would he do that if he can get every pitcher in mlb at -146

Quite a few possibilities.

1. He presumably already maxed that bet and is looking to get more down.
2. He may not have access to Pinnacle.
3. He may assume a distribution where there is more value in over 21.5 +100 than over 19.5 -146.

[wtt0315]

hey don i might take up you on it bro. lets make sure he gets sign first and then we can do it..

[donjuan]

OK. Send me a PM when he signs and we can figure out the details from there.

[5 star bomb]

How do you get to bet this at pinnacle 5 star? You live in Chicago not Canada.

Bunch of US players still at pinnacle Treece. I havent bet it yet, but I will be at Pinny

[brock]

Over sounds like a great play

[Willie Bee]

-146 when 21/23 years it has cashed!?!?

But it hasn't in two of the last 13. I love to see statistical trends and all, but hate it when they're 'padded' in any manner and completely different eras are lumped together. A ton has changed in baseball since 1983, and I generally don't like going back much more than say 70 of the current group of active players to for some stat to really matter to me.

That said, I do think the price isn't too bad for the odds of there being a 20-game winner. However, I expect the number of 20-game winners will continue to drop, a decrease that is pronounced with each passing season in this current era. The game is now managed to get the majority of starting pitchers just into the sixth, maybe through it. The number of guys who can average 6.67 IP per start and higher has significantly plunged since the mid-90s, and there's no sign it's going to change soon.

I seriously think they might start tinkering with the 5-IP minimum rule that a starter has to go to even be considered for a win soon. By soon, I mean it will at least be discussed in the next five seasons. It's actually a completely worthless stat unless a pitcher averages in excess of 7½ innings per start, in my opinion, and even then it has to be tempered with the fact the stat is dependent upon the pitcher's offense...something that hurlers in the weenie AL don't have even an at bat to affect.