Skip to content

Phillies and Red Sox increased their World Series odds at the Yankees’ expense

Dec 21, 2010, 1:21 PM EDT

gambling poster

At the beginning of the offseason I posted’s gambling odds on each team winning the World Series in 2011, so now that we’re about halfway through the offseason and most of the major free agents have signed I thought it would be interesting to re-examine the same odds for all 30 teams.

First, here are the teams Bodog pegged as improving their World Series chances since November 2:

               OLD      NEW
Phillies       6/1      7/2
Red Sox       10/1      9/2
Tigers        35/1     28/1
Mets          40/1     35/1
Brewers       65/1     40/1
Nationals     80/1     65/1

Not surprisingly, the Phillies’ addition of Cliff Lee and the Red Sox’s additions of Adrian Gonzalez and Carl Crawford significantly improve their odds. Detroit added Victor Martinez and Joaquin Benoit while re-signing Magglio Ordonez. Milwaukee traded for Zack Greinke. Washington signed Jayson Werth. And … well, I’m not sure what the Mets really did to improve their odds, other than hiring Sandy Alderson as general manager.

Next, here are the teams Bodog pegged as decreasing their World Series chances since November 2:

               OLD      NEW
Yankees        4/1      6/1
Giants        10/1     12/1
Twins         16/1     18/1
Cardinals     14/1     20/1
Rays          14/1     20/1
Rangers       16/1     20/1
Rockies       18/1     20/1
Braves        18/1     22/1
Reds          20/1     25/1
White Sox     22/1     25/1
Dodgers       22/1     30/1
Padres        20/1     35/1
Cubs          30/1     35/1
Astros        65/1     75/1
Orioles       75/1     80/1
Mariners      70/1    100/1

A much longer list, which makes some sense given that Philadelphia and Boston were already among the favorites and significantly improved their odds. Bodog initially had the Yankees as the clear favorites to win the World Series at 4-to-1, but now they’re behind the Phillies and Red Sox at 6-to-1. Surprisingly the Rangers’ odds didn’t get that much longer despite losing Lee, but the Padres’ odds got much worse after dealing Gonzalez.

And finally, here are the teams with the same World Series odds they had on November 2:

Angels        25/1
Marlins       35/1
Athletics     35/1
Blue Jays     50/1
D-Backs       80/1
Indians       80/1
Royals       125/1
Pirates      150/1

Apparently trading Greinke doesn’t change anything for the Royals when no one would have ever bet on them winning the World Series in the first place.

  1. yankeesfanlen - Dec 21, 2010 at 1:30 PM

    The Mets went from 40/1 to 35/1? Looks like the price of glue is going up.

    Will explain to those who don’t know Nicely Nicely.

    • Ari Collins - Dec 21, 2010 at 2:14 PM

      That would be me.

      • yankeesfanlen - Dec 21, 2010 at 2:27 PM

        Am just making fun of old horseplayers. Nicely Nicely was the Stubby Kaye character in “Guys and Dolls” (I got this horse right here, his name is Paul Revere…) They used to say horses who came in last were headed to the glue factory.
        Just felt like making archaic references today.

    • metsfan5729 - Dec 23, 2010 at 10:28 AM

      I love the Mets! They are going to win the World Series in 2011.

  2. Mr. Jason "El Bravo" Heyward - Dec 21, 2010 at 1:38 PM

    Apparently signing Pena did not help the Cubs’ chances, huh?

    • anythingbutyanks - Dec 21, 2010 at 1:57 PM

      It’s only been 103 years…I don’t see Pena as quite that significant of an acquisition. You know what is really sick, though….on a payroll to payroll comparison, how far apart the Phillies and Cubs are in talent even though they spent about the same money last year and the Cubs massively outspent them in 2009.

  3. bloodysock - Dec 21, 2010 at 1:56 PM

    Tampa Bay only went from 14/1 to 20/1 after their roster was decimated?

    • Ari Collins - Dec 21, 2010 at 1:59 PM

      Sounds about right to me. They lost a 7 win player, a 1 win player, and several relievers off a 97-win team that’s adding even more young talent next year. I wouldn’t call that decimated.

    • billtpa - Dec 21, 2010 at 2:29 PM

      I’m surprised they dropped that much. If I were to bet on one team (and I’m not), that’s probably where I’d put my money.

  4. Ari Collins - Dec 21, 2010 at 1:57 PM

    These odds have some issues. The Mets and Cubs have better chances to win the WS than the Brewers?

    • billtpa - Dec 21, 2010 at 2:32 PM

      Part of that has to be the size of the fanbase. There are likely to be more Mets and Cubs fans placing bets than Brewers fans, and they’ll tend to place a sentimental bet on their favorite team even though they know it makes no sense.

      Just guessing, no particular knowledge of how it all works….

  5. derf2 - Dec 21, 2010 at 2:11 PM

    Good story.

  6. sportsdrenched - Dec 21, 2010 at 2:27 PM

    Apparently trading Greinke doesn’t change anything for the Royals when no one would have ever bet on them winning the World Series in the first place
    Exactly, so why not get some prospects for him.

  7. Detroit Michael - Dec 21, 2010 at 2:40 PM

    Toronto traded away Shawn Marcum, who was their #1 starter last year, but their odds didn’t move.

  8. okobojicat - Dec 21, 2010 at 2:48 PM

    The thing with assuming that the Rays odds “plummeted” or the Ranger odds fell is that the expectation (or the very real possibility) of losing Lee and Crawford were probably built into the original expectations. That is why their odds didn’t move very much. However, the Phillies were very unexpected to land Lee, so their odds moved up precipitously. Also, the Gonzalez Padres/Red Sox trade while considered likely, could not be considered expected. So, when the talent levels changed their, they had to drastically change the odds.

    Really, there is nothing unexpected at this point. The changing only shows that odds makers have less clue where talented free agents will end up than the pundits.

    • Ari Collins - Dec 21, 2010 at 2:51 PM

      Excellent point.

  9. Utley's Hair - Dec 21, 2010 at 3:14 PM

    And the odds of these odds being applicable in May or June—not to mention September—are what?

    • frankvzappa - Dec 21, 2010 at 4:45 PM

      doesnt matter what they are in September if you lock it in now…betting both would be a decent call, its free money because one or the other will surely take it home…

      • larryhockett - Dec 21, 2010 at 5:04 PM

        Right, because EVERYONE knew it would be the Giants over the Rangers in 2010.

  10. mtner77 - Dec 21, 2010 at 8:36 PM

    What?? What kind of crooked odds are these? My M’s are only 28th at 100/1, while KC is 29th at 125/1? And Pittsburgh is 30th at 150/1? Come on oddsmakers, we want to be #1….er, I mean #30. (Heck we want be first at SOMETHING this season).

    I see our odds went from 75/1 to 100/1 though. Trading Rob Johnson to the Padres must have REALLY done us in. Maybe if we DFA the Mariner Moose too it will put us over the top! We are on our way!

    I am already practising my victory chant:

    We’re Number Thirty!
    We’re Number Thirty!

    There is NO WAY we are letting them stinkin’ Royals and stinkin’ Pirates beat us! This is WAR!

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. B. Crawford (2761)
  2. Y. Puig (2430)
  3. C. Correa (2394)
  4. G. Stanton (2368)
  5. G. Springer (2275)
  1. H. Pence (2195)
  2. J. Hamilton (2093)
  3. M. Teixeira (1884)
  4. H. Ramirez (1874)
  5. J. Fernandez (1857)