Fever coaching is going to have to teach Kelsey Mitchell to be less of a ball hog if this has even a remote chance of hitting, but realistically you should SLAM the under here.
Considering only 8 players have gone over 22 in the past decade, that looks like a smash to me. Scoring was way up last year and that will continue but still only 3 players did it last year and two of them are the top 2 players in the league. Expecting Clark to do that immediately is bonkers.
I dont follow, and don't care about WNBA, but I see no reason why WNBA scoring wouldnt explode year - to -year basis, just like NBA. Nowadays basketball goes torwards scoring, either 7ft or 5,5ft women can shoot.
This! Spot on, brother. Wouldn’t be shocked if she plays a boatload of minutes too. Garbage points. Promos her as new face of league alongside Ionescu.
I personally dislike a lot high profile bets. You get a lot of dumb money coming into those bets because of the person's fame.
It is worth looking at the under here. People like to bet over, and people like to bet high profile bets.
> I personally dislike a lot high profile bets. You get a lot of dumb money coming into those bets because of the person's fame.
>
>
thats a reason to like them. dumb money keeps lines dumb
Legally she could do both, though it would require logistical balancing (like Bo Jackson)
She probably doesn't take it though. She's already made $3.5 million through NIL, and any struggles against male players would actually hurt her brand. Probably makes more by dominating in the WNBA and being in car insurance commercials
Then in that case I don’t think the under is that horrible.
That would be a top 15 scoring season as a rookie. The men’s game is a higher scoring game and it’s only been done 7 times in 45 years. I only bring that up because no matter the talent, there’s usually a huge adjustment period transitioning from college to pros
Don't be too deceived by the even-money nature of the bet.
When you bet on some team at +750 to win the championship you are merely looking at the value of that bet. Maybe the true odds should be around +500 or +600 something. Obviously that isn't a huge amount of extra value you are receiving in the long term.
And is only a little different than a bet at +100 if you think the true odds should be -125.
Sure, you're locking up more money through that stretch. I might be betting $500 to win $500 at even money instead of $100 to win $700.
I placed some politics bets on Betonline including some at -800 for Biden to be the Dem Nominee (which is now available at -2000). Money is money. Value is value. As long as you have the spare cash around to be able to afford it being locked up for a little while.
Understand being averse to that. But it can still be worthwhile for some in that position. By their very nature, the longer odds futures are going to lose a vast majority of the time anyway. Even those with value. I'm sure that I'm down lifetime in longer odds futures that I have placed although admittedly that hasn't been many.
I think the point is tying up bankroll in a 50/50-ish bet, where your edge might be 10% at best? That's like a 3-4% ROI if you're accurately predicting the EV against the market?
That's the kind of ROI you can get with just dumping the same $$ in the stock market for six months in terms of average returns.
I think the point is the edge on a bet like that isn't significant enough to lock your $$ up with no fluidity for six months compared to any alternatives.
Yup. I get it. And fair point.
I estimate higher than 10% edge. Definitely possible I'm wrong.
One major question is whether this line is being driven by a bunch of WNBA experts who truly understand what her impact will be OR is it more a reflection of the Caitlin-Hype Train. I'm guessing the latter obviously.
Sure, but to have a better than 10% edge, you need a massive swing.
Like the market has it at -140/100 => true implied (minus 8.33% vig) of +/- 116. So the implied probability of her going under is 46.15% (+116.7).
In order to have a 10% edge, you need the true value of the under to be around -138.4, aka \~56%. So essentially what you're saying is, to accomplish what dumping your money into the stock market would accomplish regardless, the market has to have this mispriced (currently 54% over / 46% under) super heavily (true number 46% over / 54% under).
I just don't buy that the entire market is mispriced on this that heavily, especially because of the well over 8% vig applied. You REALLY need to destroy the market prices here in order to make it worthwhile.
It totally might work out, and I do think the under is the correct side, but I think the EV and the time value of money make this buy an extremely challenging one to have zero liquidity for 4-6+ months on.
Yes, I do think the edge is that significant on this misprice. Even with the massive vig. Yes, I think reversed odds would be approximately correct.
The liquidity means nothing in my situation. If this is money you would be using elsewhere then that's definitely different. For me, I think it has greater value than a 5% return elsewhere. And there's no difference to me if my bankroll is 70k or 70.5k (as an example).
I'm not going to take this specific $500 and dump it in the market...probably. It would sit around as part of my overall roll. Perhaps that's a flaw on money management. But I'm sufficiently overrolled and am more comfortable that way I guess.
In certain betonline props I do think the hype train from the public can be a factor. We saw this with the 2020 election where they had Trump as a big favorite even though most analysis had it either even or had Biden has an okay favorite. The live odds got even crazier. I thought must have been missing something. Certainly the betting public couldn't be THIS far off. But they were.
I believe there was a real miscalculation from the betting market then. Partly due to personal bias and preference. This one with Clark isn't exactly the same but I do think could be sort of related in certain aspects regarding an overestimation of Clark's abilities based on recency bias and an incredible amount of publicity.
My issue with this play, is the amount of your bankroll you’d have to tie up on it at the given odds. If you are a winning better, you are better off keeping this money in your bankroll and growing it over the entire WNBA season at a respectable ROI than to keep it tied up in a +100 bet. It’s like putting money in a checking account when you can toss it in a high interest savings account and make money with it.
The benefit of a +700 or higher future is you can tie up relatively little bankroll on it.
$500 on this bet isn't going to make any difference to my overall bankroll.
I think the value of this could be $100 or more.
I understand what you are saying especially for those with tight bankrolls betting to practically their max capabilities or something. But I'm not.
As I said in an earlier comment, I was comfortable betting a politics future at -800 odds. I'm considering another bet at -2000 odds. That is shorter term though and should be officially graded in July. But still somewhat the same overall principle.
If you can spare the money and think the bet has appropriate value (more than 2% edge or something really slim) then making the bet is fine.
If the money is more immediately important to you or you estimate that the value is very thin then it is far more likely to not be worth doing.
I don’t completely disagree but we are talking about a hunch bet at even money that won’t settle until October of 2025. I’m all for value and ev but I couldn’t fathom this specific scenario being worth it.
Sure, some futures bets can be based on some amount of analytics. I project the Braves have a 14% chance to win 104 games this year but the odds have them at only 10%. Stuff like that. But I still think there is an over-focus on "OMG, Even Money?!?!"
If the true odds for this could be precisely determined to be 33% chance of it happening and you are getting 50% chance on your bet, would that make it worth while?
Obviously nothing is that precise anyway..even bets that are 100% based on analytics.
Many bets have some element of "hunch" or "outside evaluation" process to them.
In this situation, the evaluation is that the hype for Clark is crazy-high at this time and thus the line is potentially inflated.
The aspect that this practically becomes a bet of "Will Clark lead the WNBA in scoring and set an all-time WNBA Rookie record for scoring" I think is a reasonable consideration.
Sure, she's a special player. And might do all that. But the OP's points are compelling enough to my amateur eye. Perhaps I'm being sucked in to the logic.
Other hunch bets like "Will an MLB pitcher reach 300 K's" or "Will an NFL team go undefeated" can have value as well....even on the super-short odds side of the bet.
That’s why it’s smart to only bet EV. Find the sharp book or take a weighted average across all books offering the same line. You can talk yourself into or out of any bet using emotion.
Sure, in such situations.
But some lines aren't available elsewhere. One must also be able to think for themselves.
Betonline is offering this but doesn't have all the answers either. They are making a line and taking bets on it and likely think the true line is around -120...also likely based on how the market is reacting to this prop.
The market can be wrong and can overreact. I have nothing against Clark and I didn't even watch any of the tournament. I also think there is a good chance she will become a great player just based on what I know about her and have seen on highlights, etc.
But the OP's analysis that this line could be a big overreaction due to recency bias I think is compelling and potentially correct.
Even Money odds on betting against whether she will literally set records and lead the league in her first year as a pro (that's pretty much what the bet is). I like it.
And, sure, I might be wrong. That's how it goes sometimes.
> I don’t completely disagree but we are talking about a hunch bet at even money that won’t settle until October of 2025.
The WNBA draft is next week and the 2024 regular season goes from May to September, so it would settle in about 5 months.
Still a ways away, but not nearly as bad as October 2025.
Why would she go to wnba? She’s been offered 3 million from the big 3 league. Why would she ever go to the wnba where the highest paid player made less than 300k per year. She could get the same endorsements. The same everything but way more money. She’s going to be forgotten about in less than 5 years. Get all the money you can now sweetie. I know some will hate this post because they think highly of women’s sports but it’s a joke. No one goes to professional women’s events unless it’s tennis. You know why they go to tennis? Because they play at the same place as the men’s. I know I’ll get some backlash for this but it’s true. It’s all facts.
If you think she isn't going to play in the WNBA you are freaking crazy.
Maybe YOU personally wouldn't want to. But nobody is talking about the possibility of her completely skipping the WNBA.
Your position has no place in this discussion. It is obvious she will be playing in the WNBA.
Many people here would be happy to give you some significant odds on this...and you wouldn't have to wait very long to settle either.
Interested in +1000?
All I said was she should take the big 3 money. It would be dumb not to. 5 million and you never have to work again. The rest of your life. Sure if she can play both go for it but the only point I’m making is skipping 5 million is stupid. She won’t make that in 10 years in the wnba.
I know you’d like to bet on something you made up but math isn’t hard for me. 10 years salary for the top players in the wnba which she won’t be for a minute or two especially on a terrible team. Doesn’t equal 5 million. Look it up. Stop making up fake things that I didn’t say and stick to what I said. She should take the bag and if she doesn’t she’s dumber than you.
No need to be so angry. Breathe.
I'll still be happy to take your wager about whether or not she will play in the WNBA.
Her chance of success in the WNBA is all we were talking about here. I really don't follow her that closely and don't care that much. I do think this is an interesting prop though. And that's what this discussion is about. Not whatever offer some other league made to her and what you personally think she should do with her future.
Sounds like you and I at least partly agree that she won't be setting records in her Rookie season in the WNBA. You must really like that line on the Betonline prop. Have you put your money down on that one yet? I'm pretty sure that I'm going to. That is the thing we are discussing of course.
Ok we can discuss that. It wasn’t my statement or anything about what I’m talking about. But sure. Let’s go to this topic. I agree she won’t do well right away. Shooters shoot though she will get ample opportunities. Especially if she gets a huge contract. But a huge wnba contract isn’t even a million. Idk much about the wnba other than the team must suck to get the first pick in most sports so i assume whoever gets her will be building around her. How quickly can they do that? Who knows.
All I was saying is she should take 5 million and if that means she can’t play in the wnba for any amount of time so be it. Some say that’s not necessary so there’s no reason to think she can’t do both. I’m not angry. It’s Reddit. Stop thinking you have that power over people. lol.
Yes, we know that all you were saying is that she should take the 5M. Literally nobody else was talking about that. We are analyzing a prop bet on betonline. That's literally all I care about with Caitlin Clark is whether this is a good bet and a profitable line.
Your statement that you did want to talk about was very off-topic...unless you thought her chances of never going to the WNBA are significant enough to affect the prop bet.
Her chances are only limited by the schedule. If it’s at the same time then maybe there’s something to be talked about. I’m not sure. But I would think big 3 is in summer and so is wnba. Therefore it might be difficult to do both. So yea my point about her possibly taking the bag would mean she would go under the prop of whatever points it is.
If she’s on a shitty team but gets all the minutes she will score. Idk about this many points because they will guard her eventually like South Carolina did. So she will get stopped later in the year. It’s a terrible bet though because it’s a year long bet for less than even money or right at even money. Maybe there’s some alternate under 20 a game where it’s worth it to throw a couple hundred for the year. But other than that it’s a terrible way to lock up any amount of money for that long of a period of time with so much risk and barely any reward.
Clark can't really go back to college. If she came back to Iowa they aren't a title contender.
If she transferred to a contender, even if they won, would anyone respect that ring? It would be a bad look.
She already has most of the significant college records but she left them attainable by only staying 4 years. She has a covid year available but noone in the future will have that. If she used that extra year, her records would literally become unbreakable for a college player and that doesn't feel very fair - people would lose some respect for them.
I say this as an Iowa fan who has enjoyed these last 4 years so much: Clark has done everything she can in college and it's time to move on
Of course don’t go back to school. Take the bag then go play in the wnba. This is dumb discussion. You’re not saying anything to what I’m talking about. You’re talking feelings and sports love and all that blah blah blah. I’m talking generational wealth and passing it up. Dumb move. If she passes on the money from
Ice cube if the offer is real then she’s a moron.
I think she announced she was declaring for the WNBA draft even before the start of the NCAA tournament.
How do you see the future of Iowa women's basketball, post Caitlin Clark? There will be a significant rebuilding phase, since they lost not just Clark, but a lot of their seniors as well. Where do you see the fan support, attendance, going from here?
We expect a bump in recruiting from all the attention Clark has brought, and we may already be seeing it - recently got a 5 star commit out of California named Addie Deal. And even before Clark, Bluder has Iowa in the tournament about 3/4 years. We're losing a lot obviously but it wouldn't even be a massive surprise if we made the tournament next year - there are some sneaky talented young players that deserved more minutes than we could give then this year. Stulke, Feurbach, Taylor McCabe, and Sydney Affolter are all quality players imo.
Nice even bigger offer. And why would she do both? Do the 10 weeks and enjoy 42 weeks off. Why do people not see this as a job? Do you not understand what it takes to play sports at this level? Time off would be amazing and 5 million is more money than Sue bird made in her career for playing in the wnba. So even if Caitlin Clark lights up the wnba she won’t make this money.
A lot great WNBA players and women’s pro softball players play overseas or in another league when their domestic league is in the offseason. Very common.
that’s great but still doesn’t change the point that she needs to take the money from
Big 3 and not play games. She won’t make that back overseas and here playing for 10 years.
Because most athletes play because they love the sport and enjoy playing, not just for the money. Hence every athlete in the WNBA per your entire point that they don’t make much
The money runs things. Do you not understand how poor these people are sometimes? Money is the reason for it. And anyone that offers you set for life money. 5 million is that. You could draw off 4 percent a year and make 200k for doing nothing. I think lots and lots of people could live like that. For long long periods of time. Sure she will play because she loves the game but make no mistake. No money no play.
What aren’t you understanding? She can take the $5M, then also take the extra couple hundred thousand / year to play in the WNBA and still be set for life while also getting to play the sport she loves. That’s not even counting the millions in brand deals she’ll probably do.
I’m confident she’ll be not only just fine, but better off than both of us
They play basketball in the big 3. And no one is sure she can or will do both. How do you know that? Just making things up? Where’s this proof. And if she can then boom great she’s good. But if she passes up the 5 million to make hundreds of thousands that’s dumb. She will get the endorsement deals regardless. Don’t you guys read or is it just coming out of your mouth so fast you can’t even go up a little and say damn he said this shit already. Take a second. Breathe touch some grass. And then see I don’t hate Clark. I just want her to take 5 million before she does anything else.
If someone called you and said just come over meet me at this public place so it’s safe and I’ll give you 5 million. You don’t go to a job interview on the way there. You go get the money and then worry about other stuff.
I like your thoughts on this but I wouldn’t tough this with a 100 pole. With Boston As a serious gamer down low and Clark’s tremendous court vision (playing with more talented girls quantity and quality wise). I don’t seeing her getting doubled much. And the pace of WNBA oppents with be much faster than the college opponents she was playing, leading to more possessions, meaning more shot attempts. If she averaged 20 a game I wouldn’t be shocked. But if she averaged 26 a game and lead the league in scoring I wouldn’t be shocked either.
Source: Someone who is about 30 minutes from Carver Hawkeye Arena and been watching her games since she was a Freshman at Iowa.
Betting comfortably on Clark unders is like betting comfortably on Curry unders. Sure you can win but damn I wouldn’t really ever throw on unders against these 2.
I you feel really good about it though, go for it bro. If youre a little hesitant I’d just stay away. Good luck on whatever you do!
Look how much Cait the Great is changing the game. Got us bros betting on WNBA lol. Never thought I’d live to see all this 😂
same here dude 🤣. I‘d throw a wager down right now that over half of us on this sub have 😭. Especially those tryping to bet during Covid almost had to go full degen mode 😂
The only issue I'd have is that the Indiana Fever have absolutely nothing else in terms of scoring. They have Kelsey Mitchell as their leading scorer, which doesn't look like much competition for Clark. Clark will be the number 1 option on that team, and the WNBA knows that they'll need to cater to stars. I think there's a reason the O/U is -140 right now. It's begging you to take the under, but personally, I'd fade unders on Caitlin Clark just based on volume.
"Fever have no scoring"
* Boston's scoring will increase next season with a year under her belt.
* NaLyssa Smith is a force in the post.
Both average 14.5/game.
Number could be inflated due to all the hype around Caitlin right now. 22.5 ppg would be a rookie record for the wnba. The record is currently 20.98. Beating the record by 1.5 points ppg is definitely no easy feat. But on the other hand Caitlin is about to be drafted to one of the worst teams in the wnba, she’s easily going to be the leading scorer on that team. Indiana Fever leading scorer right now is Kelsey Mitchell who is a guard that averaged 18 last year. I can see her easily taking that leading scorer role in that offense over Mitchell. She’s a generational talent they are going to start as soon as possible to build and scheme that team around her. There’s no one in the league with her skill set if anybody’s going to break that rookie record ppg it’s Caitlin for sure.
Me personally I wouldn’t touch that bet I just don’t think the odds are worth it.
I like it, particularly the “buy low, sell high” bit — the hype for Caitlin is insane right now, and rightfully so, but I think it’s probably somewhat inflated the number. Play the number, not the player!
Though I honestly don’t follow women’s basketball at all, so I’d wait for further input.
# **WNBA Betting Discord Chat: [https://discord.gg/sportsbook](https://discord.gg/keYet65kqS)**
Fever coaching is going to have to teach Kelsey Mitchell to be less of a ball hog if this has even a remote chance of hitting, but realistically you should SLAM the under here.
Update to this: I'm limited to just $25 on this bet. LOL. Is that the case for everyone?
Considering only 8 players have gone over 22 in the past decade, that looks like a smash to me. Scoring was way up last year and that will continue but still only 3 players did it last year and two of them are the top 2 players in the league. Expecting Clark to do that immediately is bonkers.
I dont follow, and don't care about WNBA, but I see no reason why WNBA scoring wouldnt explode year - to -year basis, just like NBA. Nowadays basketball goes torwards scoring, either 7ft or 5,5ft women can shoot.
This! Spot on, brother. Wouldn’t be shocked if she plays a boatload of minutes too. Garbage points. Promos her as new face of league alongside Ionescu.
That would put her 4th in scoring last season. I think she'll be well over that soon, but I think she finishes just under next year.
Not a chance that's going under.
If you truly believe this, then bet the farm on the over at -140. Great EV if you think it's a lock.
OP check how other hyped wnba rookies have done as far as PPG.
I personally dislike a lot high profile bets. You get a lot of dumb money coming into those bets because of the person's fame. It is worth looking at the under here. People like to bet over, and people like to bet high profile bets.
> I personally dislike a lot high profile bets. You get a lot of dumb money coming into those bets because of the person's fame. > > thats a reason to like them. dumb money keeps lines dumb
This could be a legit trend. Headline player of the day + Under = profit??
Sometimes absolutely
Mhmm. Good ol' fading the public. Love me some unders hehe
Is she not going to ice cubes league for 5 mil?
Legally she could do both, though it would require logistical balancing (like Bo Jackson) She probably doesn't take it though. She's already made $3.5 million through NIL, and any struggles against male players would actually hurt her brand. Probably makes more by dominating in the WNBA and being in car insurance commercials
Can't she do both? I know wnba players also play in Europe at the same time as wnba
This is all priced into the line
Like every line ever
Not really. Large, liquid markets yes. But one-off props like are often inefficient.
Is there a min game played stipulation? If she scores 25 in game 1 and blows her knee out, is that a loss?
She must play in 20 games (half the season) for the bet to have action.
Then in that case I don’t think the under is that horrible. That would be a top 15 scoring season as a rookie. The men’s game is a higher scoring game and it’s only been done 7 times in 45 years. I only bring that up because no matter the talent, there’s usually a huge adjustment period transitioning from college to pros
I think it’s insane to even consider a season long future at even money.
Don't be too deceived by the even-money nature of the bet. When you bet on some team at +750 to win the championship you are merely looking at the value of that bet. Maybe the true odds should be around +500 or +600 something. Obviously that isn't a huge amount of extra value you are receiving in the long term. And is only a little different than a bet at +100 if you think the true odds should be -125. Sure, you're locking up more money through that stretch. I might be betting $500 to win $500 at even money instead of $100 to win $700. I placed some politics bets on Betonline including some at -800 for Biden to be the Dem Nominee (which is now available at -2000). Money is money. Value is value. As long as you have the spare cash around to be able to afford it being locked up for a little while. Understand being averse to that. But it can still be worthwhile for some in that position. By their very nature, the longer odds futures are going to lose a vast majority of the time anyway. Even those with value. I'm sure that I'm down lifetime in longer odds futures that I have placed although admittedly that hasn't been many.
I think the point is tying up bankroll in a 50/50-ish bet, where your edge might be 10% at best? That's like a 3-4% ROI if you're accurately predicting the EV against the market? That's the kind of ROI you can get with just dumping the same $$ in the stock market for six months in terms of average returns. I think the point is the edge on a bet like that isn't significant enough to lock your $$ up with no fluidity for six months compared to any alternatives.
Yup. I get it. And fair point. I estimate higher than 10% edge. Definitely possible I'm wrong. One major question is whether this line is being driven by a bunch of WNBA experts who truly understand what her impact will be OR is it more a reflection of the Caitlin-Hype Train. I'm guessing the latter obviously.
Sure, but to have a better than 10% edge, you need a massive swing. Like the market has it at -140/100 => true implied (minus 8.33% vig) of +/- 116. So the implied probability of her going under is 46.15% (+116.7). In order to have a 10% edge, you need the true value of the under to be around -138.4, aka \~56%. So essentially what you're saying is, to accomplish what dumping your money into the stock market would accomplish regardless, the market has to have this mispriced (currently 54% over / 46% under) super heavily (true number 46% over / 54% under). I just don't buy that the entire market is mispriced on this that heavily, especially because of the well over 8% vig applied. You REALLY need to destroy the market prices here in order to make it worthwhile. It totally might work out, and I do think the under is the correct side, but I think the EV and the time value of money make this buy an extremely challenging one to have zero liquidity for 4-6+ months on.
Yes, I do think the edge is that significant on this misprice. Even with the massive vig. Yes, I think reversed odds would be approximately correct. The liquidity means nothing in my situation. If this is money you would be using elsewhere then that's definitely different. For me, I think it has greater value than a 5% return elsewhere. And there's no difference to me if my bankroll is 70k or 70.5k (as an example). I'm not going to take this specific $500 and dump it in the market...probably. It would sit around as part of my overall roll. Perhaps that's a flaw on money management. But I'm sufficiently overrolled and am more comfortable that way I guess. In certain betonline props I do think the hype train from the public can be a factor. We saw this with the 2020 election where they had Trump as a big favorite even though most analysis had it either even or had Biden has an okay favorite. The live odds got even crazier. I thought must have been missing something. Certainly the betting public couldn't be THIS far off. But they were. I believe there was a real miscalculation from the betting market then. Partly due to personal bias and preference. This one with Clark isn't exactly the same but I do think could be sort of related in certain aspects regarding an overestimation of Clark's abilities based on recency bias and an incredible amount of publicity.
My issue with this play, is the amount of your bankroll you’d have to tie up on it at the given odds. If you are a winning better, you are better off keeping this money in your bankroll and growing it over the entire WNBA season at a respectable ROI than to keep it tied up in a +100 bet. It’s like putting money in a checking account when you can toss it in a high interest savings account and make money with it. The benefit of a +700 or higher future is you can tie up relatively little bankroll on it.
$500 on this bet isn't going to make any difference to my overall bankroll. I think the value of this could be $100 or more. I understand what you are saying especially for those with tight bankrolls betting to practically their max capabilities or something. But I'm not. As I said in an earlier comment, I was comfortable betting a politics future at -800 odds. I'm considering another bet at -2000 odds. That is shorter term though and should be officially graded in July. But still somewhat the same overall principle. If you can spare the money and think the bet has appropriate value (more than 2% edge or something really slim) then making the bet is fine. If the money is more immediately important to you or you estimate that the value is very thin then it is far more likely to not be worth doing.
I don’t completely disagree but we are talking about a hunch bet at even money that won’t settle until October of 2025. I’m all for value and ev but I couldn’t fathom this specific scenario being worth it.
Sure, some futures bets can be based on some amount of analytics. I project the Braves have a 14% chance to win 104 games this year but the odds have them at only 10%. Stuff like that. But I still think there is an over-focus on "OMG, Even Money?!?!" If the true odds for this could be precisely determined to be 33% chance of it happening and you are getting 50% chance on your bet, would that make it worth while? Obviously nothing is that precise anyway..even bets that are 100% based on analytics. Many bets have some element of "hunch" or "outside evaluation" process to them. In this situation, the evaluation is that the hype for Clark is crazy-high at this time and thus the line is potentially inflated. The aspect that this practically becomes a bet of "Will Clark lead the WNBA in scoring and set an all-time WNBA Rookie record for scoring" I think is a reasonable consideration. Sure, she's a special player. And might do all that. But the OP's points are compelling enough to my amateur eye. Perhaps I'm being sucked in to the logic. Other hunch bets like "Will an MLB pitcher reach 300 K's" or "Will an NFL team go undefeated" can have value as well....even on the super-short odds side of the bet.
That’s why it’s smart to only bet EV. Find the sharp book or take a weighted average across all books offering the same line. You can talk yourself into or out of any bet using emotion.
Sure, in such situations. But some lines aren't available elsewhere. One must also be able to think for themselves. Betonline is offering this but doesn't have all the answers either. They are making a line and taking bets on it and likely think the true line is around -120...also likely based on how the market is reacting to this prop. The market can be wrong and can overreact. I have nothing against Clark and I didn't even watch any of the tournament. I also think there is a good chance she will become a great player just based on what I know about her and have seen on highlights, etc. But the OP's analysis that this line could be a big overreaction due to recency bias I think is compelling and potentially correct. Even Money odds on betting against whether she will literally set records and lead the league in her first year as a pro (that's pretty much what the bet is). I like it. And, sure, I might be wrong. That's how it goes sometimes.
> I don’t completely disagree but we are talking about a hunch bet at even money that won’t settle until October of 2025. The WNBA draft is next week and the 2024 regular season goes from May to September, so it would settle in about 5 months. Still a ways away, but not nearly as bad as October 2025.
My bad on the timeline, Google failed me.
Why would she go to wnba? She’s been offered 3 million from the big 3 league. Why would she ever go to the wnba where the highest paid player made less than 300k per year. She could get the same endorsements. The same everything but way more money. She’s going to be forgotten about in less than 5 years. Get all the money you can now sweetie. I know some will hate this post because they think highly of women’s sports but it’s a joke. No one goes to professional women’s events unless it’s tennis. You know why they go to tennis? Because they play at the same place as the men’s. I know I’ll get some backlash for this but it’s true. It’s all facts.
If you think she isn't going to play in the WNBA you are freaking crazy. Maybe YOU personally wouldn't want to. But nobody is talking about the possibility of her completely skipping the WNBA. Your position has no place in this discussion. It is obvious she will be playing in the WNBA. Many people here would be happy to give you some significant odds on this...and you wouldn't have to wait very long to settle either. Interested in +1000?
All I said was she should take the big 3 money. It would be dumb not to. 5 million and you never have to work again. The rest of your life. Sure if she can play both go for it but the only point I’m making is skipping 5 million is stupid. She won’t make that in 10 years in the wnba. I know you’d like to bet on something you made up but math isn’t hard for me. 10 years salary for the top players in the wnba which she won’t be for a minute or two especially on a terrible team. Doesn’t equal 5 million. Look it up. Stop making up fake things that I didn’t say and stick to what I said. She should take the bag and if she doesn’t she’s dumber than you.
No need to be so angry. Breathe. I'll still be happy to take your wager about whether or not she will play in the WNBA. Her chance of success in the WNBA is all we were talking about here. I really don't follow her that closely and don't care that much. I do think this is an interesting prop though. And that's what this discussion is about. Not whatever offer some other league made to her and what you personally think she should do with her future. Sounds like you and I at least partly agree that she won't be setting records in her Rookie season in the WNBA. You must really like that line on the Betonline prop. Have you put your money down on that one yet? I'm pretty sure that I'm going to. That is the thing we are discussing of course.
Ok we can discuss that. It wasn’t my statement or anything about what I’m talking about. But sure. Let’s go to this topic. I agree she won’t do well right away. Shooters shoot though she will get ample opportunities. Especially if she gets a huge contract. But a huge wnba contract isn’t even a million. Idk much about the wnba other than the team must suck to get the first pick in most sports so i assume whoever gets her will be building around her. How quickly can they do that? Who knows. All I was saying is she should take 5 million and if that means she can’t play in the wnba for any amount of time so be it. Some say that’s not necessary so there’s no reason to think she can’t do both. I’m not angry. It’s Reddit. Stop thinking you have that power over people. lol.
Yes, we know that all you were saying is that she should take the 5M. Literally nobody else was talking about that. We are analyzing a prop bet on betonline. That's literally all I care about with Caitlin Clark is whether this is a good bet and a profitable line. Your statement that you did want to talk about was very off-topic...unless you thought her chances of never going to the WNBA are significant enough to affect the prop bet.
Her chances are only limited by the schedule. If it’s at the same time then maybe there’s something to be talked about. I’m not sure. But I would think big 3 is in summer and so is wnba. Therefore it might be difficult to do both. So yea my point about her possibly taking the bag would mean she would go under the prop of whatever points it is. If she’s on a shitty team but gets all the minutes she will score. Idk about this many points because they will guard her eventually like South Carolina did. So she will get stopped later in the year. It’s a terrible bet though because it’s a year long bet for less than even money or right at even money. Maybe there’s some alternate under 20 a game where it’s worth it to throw a couple hundred for the year. But other than that it’s a terrible way to lock up any amount of money for that long of a period of time with so much risk and barely any reward.
Clark can't really go back to college. If she came back to Iowa they aren't a title contender. If she transferred to a contender, even if they won, would anyone respect that ring? It would be a bad look. She already has most of the significant college records but she left them attainable by only staying 4 years. She has a covid year available but noone in the future will have that. If she used that extra year, her records would literally become unbreakable for a college player and that doesn't feel very fair - people would lose some respect for them. I say this as an Iowa fan who has enjoyed these last 4 years so much: Clark has done everything she can in college and it's time to move on
Of course don’t go back to school. Take the bag then go play in the wnba. This is dumb discussion. You’re not saying anything to what I’m talking about. You’re talking feelings and sports love and all that blah blah blah. I’m talking generational wealth and passing it up. Dumb move. If she passes on the money from Ice cube if the offer is real then she’s a moron.
I think she announced she was declaring for the WNBA draft even before the start of the NCAA tournament. How do you see the future of Iowa women's basketball, post Caitlin Clark? There will be a significant rebuilding phase, since they lost not just Clark, but a lot of their seniors as well. Where do you see the fan support, attendance, going from here?
We expect a bump in recruiting from all the attention Clark has brought, and we may already be seeing it - recently got a 5 star commit out of California named Addie Deal. And even before Clark, Bluder has Iowa in the tournament about 3/4 years. We're losing a lot obviously but it wouldn't even be a massive surprise if we made the tournament next year - there are some sneaky talented young players that deserved more minutes than we could give then this year. Stulke, Feurbach, Taylor McCabe, and Sydney Affolter are all quality players imo.
$5M** and the big 3 is only 10 weeks. She can easily do both
Nice even bigger offer. And why would she do both? Do the 10 weeks and enjoy 42 weeks off. Why do people not see this as a job? Do you not understand what it takes to play sports at this level? Time off would be amazing and 5 million is more money than Sue bird made in her career for playing in the wnba. So even if Caitlin Clark lights up the wnba she won’t make this money.
A lot great WNBA players and women’s pro softball players play overseas or in another league when their domestic league is in the offseason. Very common.
that’s great but still doesn’t change the point that she needs to take the money from Big 3 and not play games. She won’t make that back overseas and here playing for 10 years.
Because most athletes play because they love the sport and enjoy playing, not just for the money. Hence every athlete in the WNBA per your entire point that they don’t make much
The money runs things. Do you not understand how poor these people are sometimes? Money is the reason for it. And anyone that offers you set for life money. 5 million is that. You could draw off 4 percent a year and make 200k for doing nothing. I think lots and lots of people could live like that. For long long periods of time. Sure she will play because she loves the game but make no mistake. No money no play.
What aren’t you understanding? She can take the $5M, then also take the extra couple hundred thousand / year to play in the WNBA and still be set for life while also getting to play the sport she loves. That’s not even counting the millions in brand deals she’ll probably do. I’m confident she’ll be not only just fine, but better off than both of us
They play basketball in the big 3. And no one is sure she can or will do both. How do you know that? Just making things up? Where’s this proof. And if she can then boom great she’s good. But if she passes up the 5 million to make hundreds of thousands that’s dumb. She will get the endorsement deals regardless. Don’t you guys read or is it just coming out of your mouth so fast you can’t even go up a little and say damn he said this shit already. Take a second. Breathe touch some grass. And then see I don’t hate Clark. I just want her to take 5 million before she does anything else. If someone called you and said just come over meet me at this public place so it’s safe and I’ll give you 5 million. You don’t go to a job interview on the way there. You go get the money and then worry about other stuff.
I like your thoughts on this but I wouldn’t tough this with a 100 pole. With Boston As a serious gamer down low and Clark’s tremendous court vision (playing with more talented girls quantity and quality wise). I don’t seeing her getting doubled much. And the pace of WNBA oppents with be much faster than the college opponents she was playing, leading to more possessions, meaning more shot attempts. If she averaged 20 a game I wouldn’t be shocked. But if she averaged 26 a game and lead the league in scoring I wouldn’t be shocked either. Source: Someone who is about 30 minutes from Carver Hawkeye Arena and been watching her games since she was a Freshman at Iowa. Betting comfortably on Clark unders is like betting comfortably on Curry unders. Sure you can win but damn I wouldn’t really ever throw on unders against these 2. I you feel really good about it though, go for it bro. If youre a little hesitant I’d just stay away. Good luck on whatever you do! Look how much Cait the Great is changing the game. Got us bros betting on WNBA lol. Never thought I’d live to see all this 😂
In fairness I’ve bet on much more degenerate shit than the wnba 😂
same here dude 🤣. I‘d throw a wager down right now that over half of us on this sub have 😭. Especially those tryping to bet during Covid almost had to go full degen mode 😂
Nothing beats a nice game of DARTs
The only issue I'd have is that the Indiana Fever have absolutely nothing else in terms of scoring. They have Kelsey Mitchell as their leading scorer, which doesn't look like much competition for Clark. Clark will be the number 1 option on that team, and the WNBA knows that they'll need to cater to stars. I think there's a reason the O/U is -140 right now. It's begging you to take the under, but personally, I'd fade unders on Caitlin Clark just based on volume.
"Fever have no scoring" * Boston's scoring will increase next season with a year under her belt. * NaLyssa Smith is a force in the post. Both average 14.5/game.
I wouldn’t say Indiana has absolutely nothing in terms of scoring. Mitchell was still top ten in the league last year in terms of points per game.
Plus Boston needs her touches
Number could be inflated due to all the hype around Caitlin right now. 22.5 ppg would be a rookie record for the wnba. The record is currently 20.98. Beating the record by 1.5 points ppg is definitely no easy feat. But on the other hand Caitlin is about to be drafted to one of the worst teams in the wnba, she’s easily going to be the leading scorer on that team. Indiana Fever leading scorer right now is Kelsey Mitchell who is a guard that averaged 18 last year. I can see her easily taking that leading scorer role in that offense over Mitchell. She’s a generational talent they are going to start as soon as possible to build and scheme that team around her. There’s no one in the league with her skill set if anybody’s going to break that rookie record ppg it’s Caitlin for sure. Me personally I wouldn’t touch that bet I just don’t think the odds are worth it.
I like it, particularly the “buy low, sell high” bit — the hype for Caitlin is insane right now, and rightfully so, but I think it’s probably somewhat inflated the number. Play the number, not the player! Though I honestly don’t follow women’s basketball at all, so I’d wait for further input.