MLB Sharp Report: Pros Betting Cardinals vs. Royals, 2 Other Wednesday Games

MLB Sharp Report: Pros Betting Cardinals vs. Royals, 2 Other Wednesday Games article feature image
Credit:

Jeff Curry-USA TODAY Sports. Pictured: St. Louis Cardinals left fielder Marcell Ozuna (23), center fielder Dexter Fowler (25) and right fielder Yairo Munoz (34).

  • Sharps are finding value on Wednesday's MLB slate, hitting games from the afternoon into the evening.
  • Sports Insights' Bet Signals and betting market percentages reveal which bets the pros are making.

Getaway Wednesday means a full day of MLB action, and sharp bettors have taken notice. They’ve sprinkled a little action throughout the entire slate, hitting matchups ranging from 2:10 p.m. to 8:15 p.m. ET.

Minnesota Twins vs. Milwaukee Brewers

2:10 p.m. ET | Kyle Gibson (11-5, 4.24 ERA) vs. Gio Gonzalez (2-1, 3.20 ERA)

If you’ve already jumped ahead to the bottom of this writeup, you might be a little confused to find a team that opened at -130 but is now -115 being considered a sharp play.

This, however, is a perfect example of why it can be important to consult complete line histories as opposed to just opening and current numbers.

Yes, the Brewers did open at -130, and yes, they are currently -115. But a lot happened in between.

Minnesota has been drawing the majority of bets since opening, and with (apparently) no sharp action hitting the Brew Crew at that point, the Brewers were brought down to around a a pick’em during the overnight hours.

Some books even flipped Milwaukee to an underdog. That’s when sharps decided the line had moved too far.

Three Sports Insights Bet Signals have hit the Brewers (one at -107, two at -109), returning them comfortably to minus-money territory.

Milwaukee is also generating a higher percentage of money (56%) than bets (42%), meaning it’s attracting the bigger bettors — the ones more likely to be sharps.

Sharp angle: Brewers (moved from -105 to -115)

Arizona Diamondbacks vs. Colorado Rockies

3:10 p.m. ET | Robbie Ray (10-7, 3.99 ERA) vs. Kyle Freeland (3-10, 7.06 ERA)

If you’re a common reader of these reports, you’ve probably noticed a general trend when it comes to sharp plays: they’re often against the public.

It’s important to understand, though, that sharps aren’t reacting to the public’s opinion. In rare cases that a line moves simply as a result of public betting — like the game above — that might open up a door for wiseguys to find value, but they are always betting based on the edges they find from lines and totals they generate themselves.

All of that is to say that there’s no reason sharps and public bettors can’t be aligned on a given bet, and this afternoon’s D-backs-Rockies matchup serves as a good example.

Arizona opened around a -120 favorite, and — as favorites usually are — has been the popular side, drawing 70% of bettors. The Snakes are now listed at a consensus -140, which is in line with their popularity, but a 20-cent move on a line this close to even is usually going to take a bit more than just some action from Average Joes.

In this case, that sharp action is again identified by the 85% of actual money coming in on the D-backs, as well as another steam move at -124.

Sharp angle: D-backs (moved from -120 to -140)

St. Louis Cardinals vs. Kansas City Royals

8:15 p.m. ET | Dakota Hudson (10-6, 4.01 ERA) vs. Brad Keller (7-12, 4.09 ERA)

After closing as high as -250 last night (and winning, 2-0), the Cardinals opened all the way down in the -140 range for tonight’s series finale. Unsurprisingly, that’s brought us back to the classic pros vs. Joes scenario.

Two-thirds of bettors have jumped on the Cards’ train, but their line has fallen from -140 down to -128. On the flip side, the Royals have gone from +130 to +118. That reverse line movement serves as a dead giveaway of sharp action.

Three SI Bet Signals (two steam moves, one reverse line move) hit the Royals between +125 and +123 to help tank this line down to its current number.

Sharp angle: Royals (moved from +130 to +118)

How would you rate this article?