Editor’s Note: For more than two years now, Joe has been publishing picks here and back at All Things NIT, our former site. There have been moments of elation (the Nationals winning the 2019 World Series, the first two months of the 2019-20 college basketball season). There have been moments of frustration (the Dodgers’ 2020 NLCS comeback, the second two months of the 2019-20 college basketball season). Overall, the results have been positive, with an average return on investment, per pick, of 2% when weighting by confidence (1 for low, 2 for medium, 3 for high) across 1,364 published picks, not including pending futures. And while 2% might not sound enormous, you can do a lot with it over time.
Use these picks at your own risk. Only you are responsible for any money you lose, and you should not bet more than you can afford to lose. If you have a gambling problem, get help.
Lines for these come from the Vegas consensus or the closest approximation available at the time picks are written, unless otherwise noted. FanGraphs is heavily used in making MLB picks.
Don’t love any lines today, especially given some weather and injury, so just one future, with probably another future later this week. As usual, the futures odds are taken from Bovada due to the lack of a consistently accurate and available Vegas consensus online.
MLB Futures
For some context, here’s what our portfolio looks like at this point in the season:
Mets to win NL East +140 (2 units)
Brewers to win NL Central +300 (1 unit)
Red Sox to win AL East +2000 (1 unit)
Royals to win AL Central +1800 (1 unit)
Mets to win NLCS +600 (1 unit)
Astros to win ALCS +1000 (1 unit)
I like all of these still. They were good odds when we got them, and the odds on each, with the exception of the Mets’ NLCS one, have dropped, signaling we were, at least as judged right now (things can and will change, since eventually each of these has to win or lose, barring some really unexpected phenomena), ahead of the market.
I was uneasy placing the Mets NL East bet. Not because I didn’t think it was a good one, but because I was worried about placing too much on the Mets. That’s a concern of mine. If you have 100 years to turn a profit and an unlimited bankroll, yes, you should just take the best odds available all the time (really, you should take every profitably-projecting line every time). I have neither of these things. The nature of these picks compels me to try to profit every year, and my bankroll, though not literal in the sense of these published picks, is real in my own life, and limited. So, I don’t want to put all of my eggs on one team.
I ended up taking the Mets last week because it was a more likely bet than the one I had on them (they’re NL East favorites, they’re NLCS underdogs) and because it was so likely. Far from guaranteed, but in the 75% range.
Today, I’m not putting anything new on the Mets. I’m also not putting anything new on the Red Sox, even though Boston at 18-to-1 to win the ALCS is a steal. The Red Sox might turn out to be the best team in the AL, and I might add to my pot on them soon, but they’re still only about 30% likely to win their division. The Yankees are very likely to figure this out. The Blue Jays aren’t likely to go quietly. There’s high upside with Boston, but high risk. I don’t want to chase them too hard this early, even if it means sacrificing some potential payout down the line.
With those out of the way, the Angels are next in line. Anaheim is available at some great odds: The eROI on this future is north of 40%, trusting FanGraphs (which I do). But. They aren’t available at as good of odds as the Mets or the Red Sox (the Red Sox’ ALCS future eROI is above 100% right now). Still, for me, diversification is part of the goal, and taking this gives us two AL West teams to win the ALCS, putting us nearly 80% likely to have the AL West champion at 10-to-1 or better entering the playoffs with a reasonably likely shot of also having one of the two AL wild cards. The long and short of this? This lowers our expected ROI, raises our expected total profit, and raises the probability we profit.
Now, why the Angels:
They have arguably the third-best starting pitching in the American League, with Andrew Heaney flying under the radar, Dylan Bundy perhaps a bit overestimated but still good, and plenty of upside from Shohei Ohtani, all with Griffin Canning, José Quintana, and Alex Cobb as competent options. The fact I started with their rotation demonstrates what their concern is, because the lineup is not a concern. No lineup with Mike Trout and Anthony Rendon figures to be a concern. Their farm system isn’t deep, but it has enough good chips and the franchise should be desperate enough that if they’re in a nailbiter with the Astros towards the end of July, they could pull off a blockbuster, which puts them across the buyer/seller line in my book (the buyer/seller line needs to be considered with things like this, because it’s hard to measure the discount that should be applied to a likely deadline seller, meaning the safe bet is to steer away from teams that show no sign of buying at the deadline).
And, of course, if this hits it means we’ll also likely get to see Mike Trout in the World Series. Which changes nothing regarding the calculus here but is fun to say out loud.
Pick: Anaheim to win ALCS +1400. Low confidence.
