Download the App Image

Pirates vs. Cardinals Odds, Sharp Betting Pick: Smart Money Pounding Moneyline on Sunday

Pirates vs. Cardinals Odds, Sharp Betting Pick: Smart Money Pounding Moneyline on Sunday article feature image

Photo by Keith Gillett/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images. Pictured: St. Louis Cardinals center fielder Harrison Bader beats the throw to first

  • Waiting to see where the professional money is landing today's Pirates vs. Cardinals game?
  • PJ Walsh details why sharp bettors are seeing value on the Bucco's moneyline.

At The Action Network, we track a handful of factors that influence line movement. Odds can certainly move for many reasons, one of which is sharp action.

And under the “sharp money” umbrella, some moves are small and difficult to identify, while others are so obvious that they smack you right in the face.

Today’s Pirates vs. Cardinals game is the latter, lighting up the market and our smart money betting tools.

Let’s take a deeper dive into Sunday’s MLB matchup.

Pirates vs. Odds, Sharp Betting Pick

2:15 p.m. ET | Mitch Keller vs. Dakota Hudson

The Pirates opened as +188 underdogs against the Cardinals and have been absolutely pummeled by smart money.

Sports Insights’ Bet Signals, which track sharp action across the entire betting market, are reporting two smart money indicators on Pittsburgh, marking two unique instances in which professional bettors got down so hard on the road underdogs that oddsmakers had no choice but to aggressively adjust their moneyline odds.

In addition, The Action Network’s MLB public data is reporting just 41% of moneyline tickets landing on Pittsburgh, yet those account for 63% of all money wagered on this moneyline.

With big bets from respected players overwhelmingly backing the Pirates, sportsbooks have moved this number all the way down to +140 in an attempt to stem the flow of sharp action.

Sharp angle: Pirates (moved from +188 to +140) [Bet on Pirates-Cardinals now at Parx and win an extra $50 if there’s a home run in the game]

How would you rate this article?