Editor’s Note: Since November 2018, Joe has been publishing picks here and back at All Things NIT, our former site. Overall, the results have been mixed, with an average return on investment, per pick, of –2.0% when weighting by confidence (1 for low, 2 for medium, 3 for high) across 7,633 published picks, not including pending futures; and an average return on investment, per pick, of +2.6% across 2,293 completed high and medium-confidence picks. The low confidence picks are the problem. Most of our picks are in the low confidence category.
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’re afraid you might have a gambling problem, seek help.
Odds for these come from the better option between Bovada and BetOnline. We used to use the Vegas Consensus, but it’s no longer consistently available in an accurate form online. We rely heavily on FanGraphs for all our MLB action. We rely heavily on Nate Silver’s presidential election model for our election futures.
Active markets today: MLB moneylines and election futures.
Single-day MLB bets: Last year, we finished the season up about 8%, betting strictly moneylines. We’ve tried a similar approach this year. We’re 111–97–3 so far, down 9.00 units. We’ve gotten within reach of profitability a few times, but we haven’t been able to sustain a surge.
Election futures: These have been our best market historically, with a 17% overall ROI and significant profits both times we’ve done them—in 2020 and 2022. We started this year with a 1,000-unit portfolio and a plan to bet it as a series of 20 mini-portfolios, each leveraged against itself. We’re still approaching it in that manner, with most mini-portfolios placed and published on Saturdays. So far, we’re up 18.50 units. Those are going back into the bets.
Kansas City @ Detroit
The Tigers haven’t listed their opener yet, but they’ll probably use Kenta Maeda in a bulk relief role. Meanwhile, Michael Lorenzen debuts for the Royals.
We’re low on Lorenzen. He’s better as a reliever than a starter, and he’s one of those guys whose ERA outpaces his FIP and xERA. We’re also wary that Maeda might be settling in, with two of his last three outings positive, although that’s probably unnecessary wariness.
Even given all that, this is a pretty good price on this sort of matchup. The Royals are playing great baseball led by Bobby Witt Jr., arguably the best player alive at this moment. The Tigers are playing bad baseball. I haven’t done the appropriate research to state this as fact, but I think we see more long streaks this time of year. Mentality seems to take over. We’ll ride with Kansas City to make it six straight for both themselves and their hosts.
Pick: Kansas City to win –136. Low confidence. (No starting pitcher requirements.)
2024 United States Presidential Election
The big development in presidential markets, at least as far as our approach is concerned, is that markets are now leaning to the right of Nate Silver’s model. Up until this point, the value has been available on the Republican candidate. Now, it’s mostly available on the Democratic candidate. This is good for us. All scenarios where we’re vulnerable are scenarios in which the Democratic candidate wins the election.
Still, we want each of these mini-portfolios to be leveraged against itself, and so we start with the place where we’re seeing the most value on the Republican: Arizona. Arizona’s in the same probability block as Georgia and North Carolina, states it’s roughly 65% likely Donald Trump wins. Of those three, Silver’s model is currently projecting Arizona to be the reddest. This goes against betting odds. Why do markets disagree?
My guess is that markets are looking too heavily at the 2020 results, in which Arizona went blue by a greater extent than Georgia and North Carolina went red. Arizona is a different state demographically, though, than Georgia or North Carolina. If the GOP’s gains among Hispanic voters and gains in border states sustain themselves, they’ll show up in Arizona more than they show up in the Southeast. Georgia and North Carolina should be linked to one another. Arizona should not be linked to either of those two. This is marginal, but margin matters, especially when the gaps are as close as these gaps are. Again, there isn’t much GOP value out there right now. We want balance on that side of things, so we’re putting 34 units on this state.
Pick: Republican candidate to win Arizona –165. Medium confidence. x17
Shifting to another state in that mix: North Carolina has only gone blue once since Jimmy Carter. That one time—2012—it was very, very close. Demographically, though, North Carolina’s population is shifting in a direction more towards Virginia’s than Tennessee’s. Charlotte is growing. The western parts of the state are not.
This isn’t to say that Kamala Harris is going to carry North Carolina. It’s to say that the value’s good at this price. This also helps us with our current worst-case scenario, which is that Harris wins the Rust Belt swing states, wins Georgia, and wins Arizona. If Harris does all that, there’s a little better than a 50/50 chance she also wins North Carolina. So, two units here help us pick back up a little ground.
Pick: Democratic candidate to win North Carolina +245. Medium confidence.
This week’s big value is on Maine’s second Congressional district, where markets are overconfident that voters will continue to show up for Donald Trump.
These odds—17-to-2—are very long. Too long for an electoral vote that went blue six straight elections before Trump began his runs. Too long for a district represented by a Democrat in the U.S. House. Too long for an electoral vote that should shift at least marginally bluer with the addition of Augusta to its boundaries after the 2020 redistricting. (Just like North Carolina, Maine is seeing more population growth in its bluer areas, which pushed Augusta up into the northern Congressional district to maintain population balance.)
These odds are also too long for an electoral vote with as much uncertainty as this one holds. This is one of the least populous electoral college entities in the country, and it’s using ranked choice voting for only the second time in a presidential election. The uncertainty might be the largest in the country in Maine’s second district. We’ll put four units here and continue to bolster our returns in the event of a Democratic landslide, something the possibility of which might be underrated even by Silver’s model due to Trump’s old age.
Pick: Democratic candidate to win ME–2 +750. Medium confidence. x2
Nevada is somewhere between the Rust Belt swing states and the GA/NC/AZ mix. It’s not a border state itself, and it has a lot of Californians, but with Harris, those Californians probably cut both ways. It shifted redder in 2020, relative to the rest of the country, but it still ran to the left of even Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
Harris shouldn’t be favored here, but the value is positive, and this also helps our worst-case scenario. Four units.
Pick: Democratic candidate to win Nevada +140. Medium confidence. x2
Finally, ten units on our beloved anchor, Virginia. This price keeps holding steady even as the environment turns bluer. How generous of the market. Ten units, bringing it in line with Georgia and Arizona in portfolio magnitude.
Pick: Democratic candidate to win Virginia –240. Medium confidence. x5
