OK, from time to time, I'm going to try and post sports wagering picks for those of you out there who might be interested in that sort of thing (from a purely academic angle, of course).  First, the legal disclaimers.  The title says it all - these picks are for amusement only and should not be construed as a confession on my part to actually wagering on any sporting events, as that would be illegal in the jurisdiction in which I reside.  As we all know, risking $20 on a football game could rip apart the very fabric of our society and leave dozens of victims in its wake.  Just ask your Congressmen, they will tell you it's true.  If you live if a jurisdiction where betting on sports is illegal, do not do it.  If you live in a jurisdiction where sports gambling is legal (Oh Canada!), do your own homework before wagering, and do not risk hard-earned money on a recommendation by some idiot on the internet.  If you lose, that is your fault.  If you win, all gratuities are appreciated.  If you prefer, instead of a gratuity, you may make a donation in my name to The Human Fund - Money for People.  Now, on to Thursday's picks.

 

College Football:  Kentucky +3.5 (@ South Carolina)

                       

I was in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina last weekend and watched the entire South Carolina game vs. Mississippi State on local TV.  To put it mildly, I came away completely unimpressed with South Carolina.  Mississippi State has no discernible offense whatsoever, yet the Gamecocks were unable to put them away until the 4th quarter when they scored 14 unanswered points to win by 17.  Out of 120 Division I teams, South Carolina ranks 97th in total offense.  Top rusher Cory Boyd missed most of the game with an injured knee which is still sore.  Freshman QB Chris Smelley completed just barely over 50% of his passes and although only intercepted once, could have been picked off several more times as he continued to toss the ball into double, triple, or quadruple coverage.  I say "toss" because he wasn't firing the ball into traffic Brett Favre-style, he was almost lobbing it into heavy coverage on more than one occasion.  The South Carolina defense is ranked very high against the pass, but when you've faced 5 teams that can't throw (UL-Lafayette, Georgia, SC St., LSU, Miss. St.), that's not really surprising.  They are awful against the run, and with their best player, linebacker Jasper Brinkley, out for the year with an injury, it's not going to get any better going forward.

 

As for Kentucky, I thought of them as a one-dimensional passing offense, due to the hype surrounding QB Andre Woodson, until I looked at the stats and saw that their offense is actually very balanced.  The Wildcats average 269 yards passing per game and 224 yards rushing.  Against a poor SC run defense, I think Kentucky will run wild while the Gamecocks devote a lot of extra attention to defending the passing game.  Defensively, the Kentucky run defense is statistically as bad as South Carolina's, but the average is skewed somewhat by the 338 yards put up by Arkansas' tremendous backfield duo of Darren McFadden and Felix Jones.  Despite those rushing numbers, Kentucky still beat Arkansas 42-29.  At some point, Kentucky is going to beat up enough good teams to convince the public that they are not a fluke.  Until then, continue to take advantage of the lack of respect afforded to the Wildcats.  I hope to have several more picks for Saturday posted by Friday night.

 

MLB:  Rockies (Morales) +142

 

First, I offer a quick note on baseball wagering.  Here's all you need to know:  underdogs, run-lines, and parlays.  If you insist on taking over-inflated favorites at -160, -180, or even -200, you will be a loser in the long run.  You could win a clear majority of these games and still end up in the hole.  Don't do it.  I've been sending baseball picks to a friend of mine who is Las Vegas this week, where sports gambling is legal (and yet, the town somehow survives).  He wagered $100 on each of the following:  Rockies Monday night in the play-in game at +127, Red Sox yesterday on the run-line at -1.5 +140, and the Cubs last night at +123.  He ended up 2-1, thanks in some part to Lou Pinella's bizarre early yanking of Zambrano, but even though he only won one more game than he lost, he ended up ahead by $167.  You can play favorites, but keep the number low.  You can play -120, but don't play -170.  If you have a strong feeling about the -170 favorite, play it on the run-line (i.e. to win by at least two), and get your (hypothetical) wager in at +125 or +130 instead.

 

Now, as to the Rockies pick today, it was gratifying to learn that Rockies manager Clint Hurdle read my MLB Playoff Preview article yesterday before deciding on his rotation for this series.  He was reportedly considering starting Mark Redman in Game 2, but I suggested going with the youngsters Morales and Jimenez in Games 2 & 3.  Now, I suspected that Hurdle and other important sports figures read this site, but I underestimated how much they rely on our advice to make decisions.  Well, now it's been definitively proven.  The Phillies are starting Kyle Kendrick, so both teams are going with young, unproven pitchers who have had very nice seasons.  Yet, Vegas is giving the hottest team in the world, after winning 15 of their last 16 games, a +142 number?  That's insane, because the game is essentially a toss-up.  If the Phillies were a +142 underdog, I would be recommending them, because that's a big line where the game is up for grabs.  Add in the fact that the Rockies have already roughed up Kendrick earlier this year, and I lean even further toward the surging Rockies.  The line is this way because the public will see this as a "must-win" game for the Phillies, but I don't think baseball must-wins are the same as in, let's say, football, where the desperate team can try to win the physical battles by exerting more effort.  In baseball, physical force is not as big a factor, and actually, pressing hard for hits can even hurt hitters at the plate.  A rare gift from the linesmakers today.

 

MLB:  Indians +109  

 

            My reasoning for this pick is already explained in the playoff preview article, so I'll keep this short.  Basically, both teams can hit, but the Indians have a big pitching advantage.  Sabathia is great everywhere, but Wang cannot pitch away from Yankee Stadium.  Unfortunately for the Yankees, today's game (and a potential deciding Game 5) is in Cleveland.  Fortunately for us, the huge public support enjoyed by the Yankees forces the linesmakers to give us an underdog number on the home team.

 

MLB:  Indians +160 to win the Series over the Yankees

 

            Read the Playoff Preview.  This line is ridiculous.