| | WNBA : Money Line Matchup |
| |
CONNECTICUT CHICAGO |
|
| 156.5 | 72 Final 68 |
|
|
| | |
|
| | | |
655 | CONNECTICUT | +325 | 656 | CHICAGO | -450 |
|
|
| | |
|
| | | | One of the growing resources utilized by sports handicappers is the public betting information offered by a variety of sources. Leading the way in this is Sportsbook.com, who offers the data at its website in real-time. |
|
| | |
|
- Underdogs vs the money line (CONNECTICUT) - vs. division opponents, playing on back-to-back days. (299-108 since 1997.) (73.5%, +81.6 units. Rating = 2*) | - Favorites vs. the money line (CHICAGO) - vs. division opponents, playing on back-to-back days. (188-63 since 1997.) (74.9%, +71.9 units. Rating = 3*) | - Underdogs vs the money line (CONNECTICUT) - off a home loss by 10 points or more, with a losing record. (191-61 since 1997.) (75.8%, +69.8 units. Rating = 2*) | - Favorites vs. the money line (CHICAGO) - after playing a road game, playing on back-to-back days. (182-68 since 1997.) (72.8%, +58 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (CHICAGO) - excellent FT shooting team (>=80%) against an average FT shooting team (71-76%) after 15+ games. (140-73 since 1997.) (65.7%, +51.4 units. Rating = 2*) | - Underdogs vs the money line (CONNECTICUT) - off a home loss by 10 points or more against opponent off a road win. (107-27 since 1997.) (79.9%, +50 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (CHICAGO) - after playing a road game, playing on back-to-back days. (166-82 since 1997.) (66.9%, +49 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (CONNECTICUT) - off a home loss by 10 points or more against opponent off a road win. (125-54 since 1997.) (69.8%, +49 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (CHICAGO) - excellent free throw shooting team (>=80%) against an average free throw shooting team (71-76%), good ball handling team (<=14.5 TO's) against an average pressure defensive team (14.5-17.5 TO's). (40-17 over the last 5 seasons.) (70.2%, +30 units. Rating = 3*) | - Any team vs the money line (CHICAGO) - excellent free throw shooting team (>=80%) against an average free throw shooting team (71-76%), in a game involving two average rebounding teams (+/-3 reb/game) after 15+ games. (30-12 over the last 5 seasons.) (71.4%, +20.8 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (CHICAGO) - excellent FT shooting team (>=80%) against an average FT shooting team (71-76%) after 15+ games, in a game involving two average rebounding teams (+/-3 reb/game). (30-12 over the last 5 seasons.) (71.4%, +20.8 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (CHICAGO) - excellent FT shooting team (>=80%) against an average FT shooting team (71-76%) after 15+ games, in a game involving two average rebounding teams (+/-3 reb/game) after 15+ games. (30-12 over the last 5 seasons.) (71.4%, +20.8 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (CHICAGO) - excellent free throw shooting team (>=80%) against an average free throw shooting team (71-76%), good ball handling team (<=14.5 TO) vs. an average pressure defense (14.5-17.5 TO) after 15+ games. (31-10 over the last 5 seasons.) (75.6%, +30.5 units. Rating = 5*) | - Any team vs the money line (CHICAGO) - excellent FT shooting team (>=80%) against an average FT shooting team (71-76%) after 15+ games, good ball handling team (<=14.5 TO's) against an average pressure defensive team (14.5-17.5 TO's). (31-10 over the last 5 seasons.) (75.6%, +30.5 units. Rating = 5*) | - Any team vs the money line (CHICAGO) - excellent FT shooting team (>=80%) against an average FT shooting team (71-76%) after 15+ games, good ball handling team (<=14.5 TO) vs. an average pressure defense (14.5-17.5 TO) after 15+ games. (31-10 over the last 5 seasons.) (75.6%, +30.5 units. Rating = 5*) | - Any team vs the money line (CHICAGO) - excellent free throw shooting team (>=80%) against an average free throw shooting team (71-76%), in a game involving two average rebounding teams (+/-3 reb/game). (84-36 since 1997.) (70%, +37.2 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (CHICAGO) - off a win against a division rival, playing on back-to-back days. (100-41 since 1997.) (70.9%, +36.7 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (CHICAGO) - off a road win, playing on back-to-back days. (88-34 since 1997.) (72.1%, +34.8 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (CHICAGO) - excellent free throw shooting team (>=80%) against an average free throw shooting team (71-76%), in a game involving two good ball handling team (<=14.5 TO's). (61-28 since 1997.) (68.5%, +27.2 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (CONNECTICUT) - off a home loss by 10 points or more against opponent off 2 or more consecutive road wins. (28-3 since 1997.) (90.3%, +24.5 units. Rating = 5*) | - Any team vs the money line (CONNECTICUT) - after a game - allowing a shooting pct. of 55% or higher against opponent after a game where a team made 45% of their 3 point shots or better. (39-15 since 1997.) (72.2%, +23.3 units. Rating = 2*) | - Underdogs vs the money line (CONNECTICUT) - off a home loss by 10 points or more against opponent off 2 or more consecutive road wins. (25-2 since 1997.) (92.6%, +22.1 units. Rating = 3*) | - Any team vs the money line (CONNECTICUT) - in a game involving 2 up-tempo teams (>=62 shots/game), after a game - allowing a shooting pct. of 55% or higher. (35-14 over the last 5 seasons.) (71.4%, +20.9 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (CONNECTICUT) - up-tempo team averaging 62 or more shots/game on the season, after a game - allowing a shooting pct. of 55% or higher. (42-16 over the last 5 seasons.) (72.4%, +24.5 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (CHICAGO) - up-tempo team averaging 62 or more shots/game on the season against opponent after a game - allowing a shooting pct. of 55% or higher. (40-15 over the last 5 seasons.) (72.7%, +25.6 units. Rating = 3*) | - Any team vs the money line (CHICAGO) - good ball handling team (<=14.5 TO's) against an average pressure defensive team (14.5-17.5 TO's). (222-175 over the last 5 seasons.) (55.9%, +48.4 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (CHICAGO) - in a game involving 2 up-tempo teams (>=62 shots/game), good ball handling team (<=14.5 TO's) against an average pressure defensive team (14.5-17.5 TO's). (207-154 over the last 5 seasons.) (57.3%, +50.4 units. Rating = 2*) | - Underdogs vs the money line (CONNECTICUT) - revenging a loss versus opponent, a marginal losing team (40% to 49%) playing a winning team. (65-16 over the last 5 seasons.) (80.2%, +31.7 units. Rating = 1*) | - Any team vs the money line (CHICAGO) - off an road win where they scored 85 or more points, good team, winning 60-75% or more of their games on the season. (28-11 over the last 5 seasons.) (71.8%, +15.5 units. Rating = 1*) | - Any team vs the money line (CHICAGO) - an explosive offensive team (>=76 PPG) against a good offensive team (72-76 PPG), after a combined score of 165 points or more. (49-17 over the last 5 seasons.) (74.2%, +28.1 units. Rating = 3*) | - Any team vs the money line (CHICAGO) - after one or more consecutive overs, an explosive offensive team (>=76 PPG) against a good offensive team (72-76 PPG). (79-32 over the last 5 seasons.) (71.2%, +36.9 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (CONNECTICUT) - revenging a road loss versus opponent by 10 points or more, off a home loss. (49-20 over the last 5 seasons.) (71%, +26.2 units. Rating = 2*) |
|
|
- Home teams vs. the money line (CHICAGO) - terrible defensive team - allowing 77+ points/game on the season, after a combined score of 155 points or more. (277-267 since 1997.) (50.9%, +82.3 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (CHICAGO) - poor defensive team - allowing 73+ points/game on the season, after a combined score of 165 points or more. (248-267 since 1997.) (48.2%, +70.4 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (CHICAGO) - terrible defensive team - allowing 77+ points/game on the season, after allowing 80 points or more. (117-101 over the last 5 seasons.) (53.7%, +37.9 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (CHICAGO) - terrible defensive team - allowing 77+ points/game on the season, after a combined score of 165 points or more. (180-175 since 1997.) (50.7%, +62.8 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (CHICAGO) - after one or more consecutive overs, terrible defensive team - allowing 77+ points/game on the season. (254-246 since 1997.) (50.8%, +54.7 units. Rating = 1*) | - Any team vs the money line (CHICAGO) - vs. division opponents, off a close win by 3 points or less over a division rival. (166-132 since 1997.) (55.7%, +45.9 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (CONNECTICUT) - after allowing 70 points or more in 4 straight games against opponent after allowing 45 points or more in the first half last game. (140-99 since 1997.) (58.6%, +40.1 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (CONNECTICUT) - off a loss by 10 points or more to a division rival, with a winning percentage of between 40-49% after 15 or more games. (93-70 since 1997.) (57.1%, +31.8 units. Rating = 2*) | - Road teams vs. the money line (CONNECTICUT) - poor defensive team - allowing 73+ points/game on the season against opponent after allowing 80 points or more. (148-141 over the last 5 seasons.) (51.2%, +47.9 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (CHICAGO) - after allowing 90 points or more. (68-56 over the last 5 seasons.) (54.8%, +27.6 units. Rating = 1*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (CHICAGO) - after going over the total by more than 18 points in their previous game against opponent after going over the total by 48 or more points total in their last ten games. (31-20 since 1997.) (60.8%, +25.6 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (CHICAGO) - after going over the total by more than 18 points in their previous game against opponent after going over the total by 54 or more points total in their last ten games. (26-15 since 1997.) (63.4%, +22.7 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (CHICAGO) - after going over the total by more than 18 points in their previous game against opponent after going over the total by 48 or more points total in their last seven games. (26-16 since 1997.) (61.9%, +22.1 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (CHICAGO) - after going over the total by more than 24 points in their previous game against opponent after going over the total by 48 or more points total in their last ten games. (19-9 since 1997.) (67.9%, +21.1 units. Rating = 3*) |
|
| | |
|
CONNECTICUT | 78 | | 30-71 | 42.6% | 7-20 | 35.8% | 10-14 | 74.6% | 41 | 10 | 12 | CHICAGO | 84 | | 32-69 | 46.2% | 4-13 | 35.1% | 16-20 | 82.6% | 46 | 11 | 12 |
| The number of simulations in which each team won the game straight up are listed below. If one time held a significant advantage against the money line, the edge is indicated. | In 1000 simulated games, CHICAGO won the game straight up 675 times, while CONNECTICUT won 300 times. Edge against the money line=CONNECTICUT |
|
|
| Potential StatFox Money Line Power Trends to watch out for:
| |
CONNECTICUT is 7-3 against the money line (+7.9 Units) when their opponents make 29% to 35% of their 3 pointers in a game over the last 2 seasons. The average score was CONNECTICUT 81.8, OPPONENT 75.8 | CONNECTICUT is 138-101 against the money line (+24.5 Units) when they grab 8 to 12 offensive rebounds in a game since 1997. The average score was CONNECTICUT 75.3, OPPONENT 72.9 | CONNECTICUT is 109-88 against the money line (+26.9 Units) when they commit around the same number of turnovers as opponents since 1997. The average score was CONNECTICUT 74.9, OPPONENT 73.2 | CONNECTICUT is 53-25 against the money line (+27.9 Units) when they score 78 to 82 points in a game since 1997. The average score was CONNECTICUT 80.0, OPPONENT 76.6 | CONNECTICUT is 19-10 against the money line (+15.4 Units) when they score 78 or more points in a game over the last 2 seasons. The average score was CONNECTICUT 83.8, OPPONENT 79.1 | CHICAGO is 80-120 against the money line (-59.9 Units) in up-tempo games where they attempt 84 or more shots since 1997. The average score was CHICAGO 77.4, OPPONENT 79.1 | CHICAGO is 27-45 against the money line (-31.9 Units) when their opponents make 36% to 42% of their 3 pointers in a game since 1997. The average score was CHICAGO 74.7, OPPONENT 78.5 | CHICAGO is 40-67 against the money line (-28.2 Units) when they attempt 17 to 22 free throws in a game since 1997. The average score was CHICAGO 75.0, OPPONENT 77.7 | CHICAGO is 19-46 against the money line (-28.9 Units) when they allow 78 to 82 points in a game since 1997. The average score was CHICAGO 75.8, OPPONENT 80.3 | CHICAGO is 14-25 against the money line (-16.2 Units) when they allow 78 or more points in a game over the last 2 seasons. The average score was CHICAGO 81.8, OPPONENT 87.3 |
|
CONNECTICUT is 29-49 against the money line (-44.3 Units) when their opponents make 45% to 48% of their shots in a game since 1997. The average score was CONNECTICUT 76.2, OPPONENT 79.9 | CONNECTICUT is 8-25 against the money line (-19.5 Units) when they attempt 12 to 16 free throws in a game over the last 3 seasons. The average score was CONNECTICUT 74.1, OPPONENT 78.4 | CONNECTICUT is 40-61 against the money line (-36.2 Units) when they attempt 4 to 9 less free throws than opponents in a game since 1997. The average score was CONNECTICUT 74.1, OPPONENT 75.3 | CONNECTICUT is 1-12 against the money line (-11.2 Units) when they allow 78 or more points in a game this season. The average score was CONNECTICUT 78.7, OPPONENT 87.2 | CONNECTICUT is 0-10 against the money line (-11.0 Units) when they allow 83 or more points in a game this season. The average score was CONNECTICUT 78.7, OPPONENT 89.5 | CHICAGO is 22-5 against the money line (+15.4 Units) when they make 45% to 48% of their shots in a game over the last 3 seasons. The average score was CHICAGO 83.5, OPPONENT 76.4 | CHICAGO is 12-5 against the money line (+8.3 Units) when their opponents make 40% to 44% of their shots in a game over the last 2 seasons. The average score was CHICAGO 81.4, OPPONENT 78.1 | CHICAGO is 16-7 against the money line (+9.2 Units) when they attempt 4 to 9 more free throws than opponents in a game over the last 3 seasons. The average score was CHICAGO 80.8, OPPONENT 77.6 | CHICAGO is 14-3 against the money line (+10.3 Units) when they score 78 or more points in a game this season. The average score was CHICAGO 92.8, OPPONENT 83.5 | CHICAGO is 14-2 against the money line (+12.5 Units) when they score 83 or more points in a game this season. The average score was CHICAGO 93.6, OPPONENT 83.2 |
|
| | |
|
CHICAGO is 37-44 against the money line (-27.3 Units) when playing against a team with a losing record after 15+ games after 15+ games since 1997. The average score was CHICAGO 75.6, OPPONENT 75.5 - (Rating = 1*) | CHICAGO is 21-30 against the money line (-19.4 Units) when playing against a marginal losing team (Win Pct. 40% to 49%) since 1997. The average score was CHICAGO 75.4, OPPONENT 77.0 - (Rating = 0*) | CHICAGO is 16-23 against the money line (-16.8 Units) when playing against a marginal losing team (Win Pct. 40% to 49%) after 15+ games since 1997. The average score was CHICAGO 74.6, OPPONENT 76.9 - (Rating = 0*) | CHICAGO is 33-55 against the money line (-30.7 Units) versus teams who attempt 16 or more 3 point shots/game on the season after 15+ games since 1997. The average score was CHICAGO 73.3, OPPONENT 75.4 - (Rating = 1*) | CHICAGO is 118-155 against the money line (-49.5 Units) versus poor foul drawing teams - attempting <=24 free throws/game since 1997. The average score was CHICAGO 75.4, OPPONENT 77.0 - (Rating = 0*) | CHICAGO is 33-41 against the money line (-26.9 Units) versus poor defensive teams - shooting pct defense of >=44% since 1997. The average score was CHICAGO 75.5, OPPONENT 76.2 - (Rating = 1*) | CHICAGO is 19-26 against the money line (-18.7 Units) vs. teams who are called for 2+ more fouls/game than their opponents since 1997. The average score was CHICAGO 76.7, OPPONENT 77.5 - (Rating = 0*) | CHICAGO is 29-32 against the money line (-27.4 Units) in home games versus poor defensive teams - allowing 77+ points/game since 1997. The average score was CHICAGO 78.7, OPPONENT 78.4 - (Rating = 1*) | CHICAGO is 20-37 against the money line (-19.4 Units) versus good ball handling teams - committing <=14 turnovers/game after 15+ games since 1997. The average score was CHICAGO 74.5, OPPONENT 78.0 - (Rating = 0*) |
|
|
CONNECTICUT is 25-39 against the money line (-22.2 Units) when playing against a good team (Win Pct. 60% to 75%) after 15+ games since 1997. The average score was CONNECTICUT 73.8, OPPONENT 76.9 - (Rating = 1*) | CONNECTICUT is 8-25 against the money line (-14.7 Units) versus up-tempo teams averaging 62 or more shots/game after 15+ games over the last 2 seasons. The average score was CONNECTICUT 74.7, OPPONENT 78.9 - (Rating = 0*) | CONNECTICUT is 23-51 against the money line (-22.2 Units) versus up-tempo teams averaging 62 or more shots/game over the last 3 seasons. The average score was CONNECTICUT 74.2, OPPONENT 78.3 - (Rating = 0*) | CONNECTICUT is 15-27 against the money line (-18.4 Units) vs. excellent free throw shooting teams - making >=80% of their shots after 15+ games since 1997. The average score was CONNECTICUT 76.5, OPPONENT 79.2 - (Rating = 1*) | CONNECTICUT is 5-18 against the money line (-12.5 Units) versus teams who average 42 or more rebounds/game on the season over the last 2 seasons. The average score was CONNECTICUT 74.6, OPPONENT 80.5 - (Rating = 0*) | CONNECTICUT is 8-22 against the money line (-13.1 Units) versus terrible defensive teams - allowing 73+ points/game after 15+ games over the last 2 seasons. The average score was CONNECTICUT 74.6, OPPONENT 77.7 - (Rating = 0*) | CONNECTICUT is 4-23 against the money line (-17.0 Units) in road games versus terrible defensive teams - allowing 73+ points/game over the last 3 seasons. The average score was CONNECTICUT 70.8, OPPONENT 78.4 - (Rating = 0*) | CONNECTICUT is 5-19 against the money line (-14.6 Units) versus poor defensive teams - allowing 77+ points/game after 15+ games over the last 3 seasons. The average score was CONNECTICUT 72.1, OPPONENT 76.5 - (Rating = 1*) | CONNECTICUT is 2-9 against the money line (-8.2 Units) versus poor defensive teams - allowing 77+ points/game this season. The average score was CONNECTICUT 76.5, OPPONENT 81.4 - (Rating = 2*) | CONNECTICUT is 7-24 against the money line (-14.7 Units) versus explosive offensive teams - scoring 73+ points/game after 15+ games over the last 2 seasons. The average score was CONNECTICUT 74.8, OPPONENT 80.1 - (Rating = 0*) | CONNECTICUT is 3-15 against the money line (-11.3 Units) versus explosive offensive teams - scoring 73+ points/game this season. The average score was CONNECTICUT 75.3, OPPONENT 82.1 - (Rating = 0*) | CONNECTICUT is 21-30 against the money line (-18.3 Units) versus teams who average 7 or less steals/game on the season after 15+ games since 1997. The average score was CONNECTICUT 71.1, OPPONENT 73.0 - (Rating = 0*) | CHICAGO is 7-1 against the money line (+6.2 Units) versus good 3 point shooting teams - making >=33% of their attempts after 15+ games this season. The average score was CHICAGO 85.4, OPPONENT 79.0 - (Rating = 1*) | CHICAGO is 9-3 against the money line (+6.2 Units) versus good 3 point shooting teams - making >=33% of their attempts this season. The average score was CHICAGO 81.7, OPPONENT 79.4 - (Rating = 1*) | CHICAGO is 8-1 against the money line (+7.2 Units) versus teams who attempt 16 or more 3 point shots/game on the season this season. The average score was CHICAGO 81.2, OPPONENT 74.9 - (Rating = 3*) | CHICAGO is 6-1 against the money line (+5.2 Units) versus teams who make 5 or more 3 point shots/game on the season after 15+ games this season. The average score was CHICAGO 83.6, OPPONENT 76.6 - (Rating = 0*) | CHICAGO is 10-2 against the money line (+8.2 Units) versus teams who make 5 or more 3 point shots/game on the season this season. The average score was CHICAGO 83.1, OPPONENT 75.5 - (Rating = 3*) | CHICAGO is 15-7 against the money line (+7.0 Units) versus up-tempo teams averaging 62 or more shots/game this season. The average score was CHICAGO 82.0, OPPONENT 79.7 - (Rating = 0*) | CHICAGO is 12-5 against the money line (+6.6 Units) versus explosive offensive teams - scoring 73+ points/game this season. The average score was CHICAGO 81.2, OPPONENT 78.7 - (Rating = 1*) | CHICAGO is 13-5 against the money line (+7.5 Units) versus good ball handling teams - committing <=14 turnovers/game this season. The average score was CHICAGO 82.3, OPPONENT 78.1 - (Rating = 1*) |
|
| | |
|
CONNECTICUT is 26-17 against the money line (+15.7 Units) when playing on back-to-back days since 1997. The average score was CONNECTICUT 77.5, OPPONENT 76.2 - (Rating = 1*) | CONNECTICUT is 78-58 against the money line (+19.9 Units) revenging a loss where opponent scored 75 or more points since 1997. The average score was CONNECTICUT 78.2, OPPONENT 75.9 - (Rating = 0*) | CONNECTICUT is 42-29 against the money line (+19.4 Units) revenging a loss where opponent scored 85 or more points since 1997. The average score was CONNECTICUT 79.4, OPPONENT 77.9 - (Rating = 1*) | CONNECTICUT is 49-40 against the money line (+16.6 Units) revenging a loss versus opponent by 10 points or more since 1997. The average score was CONNECTICUT 76.4, OPPONENT 74.7 - (Rating = 0*) | CONNECTICUT is 35-21 against the money line (+15.4 Units) revenging a road loss versus opponent by 10 points or more since 1997. The average score was CONNECTICUT 77.4, OPPONENT 74.6 - (Rating = 1*) | CHICAGO is 92-118 against the money line (-42.8 Units) when playing 5 or less games in 14 days since 1997. The average score was CHICAGO 76.2, OPPONENT 77.4 - (Rating = 0*) | CHICAGO is 14-21 against the money line (-12.3 Units) after one or more consecutive overs over the last 2 seasons. The average score was CHICAGO 77.7, OPPONENT 80.1 - (Rating = 0*) | CHICAGO is 8-13 against the money line (-10.9 Units) after having won 4 or 5 of their last 6 games over the last 2 seasons. The average score was CHICAGO 77.8, OPPONENT 82.0 - (Rating = 0*) | CHICAGO is 1-9 against the money line (-10.7 Units) after a road game where both teams score 75 or more points over the last 2 seasons. The average score was CHICAGO 73.2, OPPONENT 83.0 - (Rating = 4*) | CHICAGO is 79-115 against the money line (-43.5 Units) after allowing 75 points or more since 1997. The average score was CHICAGO 75.0, OPPONENT 78.0 - (Rating = 0*) | CHICAGO is 28-35 against the money line (-23.9 Units) in home games after allowing 80 points or more since 1997. The average score was CHICAGO 76.2, OPPONENT 77.9 - (Rating = 1*) | CHICAGO is 19-43 against the money line (-22.5 Units) after allowing 45 points or more in the first half last game since 1997. The average score was CHICAGO 73.4, OPPONENT 78.3 - (Rating = 0*) | CHICAGO is 10-17 against the money line (-11.0 Units) after a game where both teams scored 75 points or more over the last 2 seasons. The average score was CHICAGO 76.7, OPPONENT 81.1 - (Rating = 0*) | CHICAGO is 11-18 against the money line (-11.3 Units) after scoring 80 points or more over the last 2 seasons. The average score was CHICAGO 76.4, OPPONENT 80.0 - (Rating = 0*) | CHICAGO is 8-13 against the money line (-12.3 Units) after scoring 90 points or more over the last 3 seasons. The average score was CHICAGO 78.9, OPPONENT 80.5 - (Rating = 0*) | CHICAGO is 13-23 against the money line (-15.9 Units) after a combined score of 155 points or more over the last 2 seasons. The average score was CHICAGO 77.6, OPPONENT 80.9 - (Rating = 1*) | CHICAGO is 4-9 against the money line (-8.9 Units) after a combined score of 175 points or more over the last 2 seasons. The average score was CHICAGO 77.5, OPPONENT 84.8 - (Rating = 0*) | CHICAGO is 62-82 against the money line (-34.4 Units) after playing a game as favorite since 1997. The average score was CHICAGO 75.6, OPPONENT 77.2 - (Rating = 0*) |
|
|
CONNECTICUT is 6-14 against the money line (-10.7 Units) when playing their 3rd game in 5 days over the last 3 seasons. The average score was CONNECTICUT 73.8, OPPONENT 77.5 - (Rating = 1*) | CONNECTICUT is 2-13 against the money line (-14.7 Units) after failing to cover 4 of their last 5 against the spread over the last 3 seasons. The average score was CONNECTICUT 70.3, OPPONENT 76.9 - (Rating = 4*) | CONNECTICUT is 16-37 against the money line (-21.0 Units) after allowing 75 points or more over the last 3 seasons. The average score was CONNECTICUT 73.4, OPPONENT 78.1 - (Rating = 1*) | CONNECTICUT is 2-9 against the money line (-8.0 Units) after allowing 40 points or more in the first half in 2 straight games over the last 3 seasons. The average score was CONNECTICUT 69.8, OPPONENT 79.2 - (Rating = 0*) | CONNECTICUT is 10-22 against the money line (-14.5 Units) after a loss by 10 points or more over the last 3 seasons. The average score was CONNECTICUT 75.3, OPPONENT 78.6 - (Rating = 1*) | CONNECTICUT is 16-31 against the money line (-16.2 Units) after a game where they failed to cover the spread over the last 3 seasons. The average score was CONNECTICUT 75.6, OPPONENT 78.5 - (Rating = 0*) | CHICAGO is 31-16 against the money line (+14.7 Units) vs. division opponents over the last 2 seasons. The average score was CHICAGO 79.3, OPPONENT 76.7 - (Rating = 2*) | CHICAGO is 9-1 against the money line (+8.0 Units) in home games off a road win against a division rival over the last 3 seasons. The average score was CHICAGO 83.8, OPPONENT 75.7 - (Rating = 2*) | CHICAGO is 7-3 against the money line (+7.9 Units) off a close win by 3 points or less over a division rival over the last 2 seasons. The average score was CHICAGO 81.3, OPPONENT 76.7 - (Rating = 0*) | CHICAGO is 12-1 against the money line (+11.0 Units) in home games off a road win over the last 3 seasons. The average score was CHICAGO 85.6, OPPONENT 77.4 - (Rating = 4*) | CHICAGO is 7-3 against the money line (+7.9 Units) after a close win by 3 points or less over the last 2 seasons. The average score was CHICAGO 81.3, OPPONENT 76.7 - (Rating = 0*) | CHICAGO is 16-5 against the money line (+11.9 Units) after playing a game as a road favorite over the last 3 seasons. The average score was CHICAGO 81.2, OPPONENT 75.7 - (Rating = 2*) |
|
| | |
|
|
All Games | 12-17 | +2 | 14-15 | 18-11 | 76.0 | 37.3 | 42.5% | 40.2 | 77.1 | 39.0 | 44.2% | 41.7 | Road Games | 5-8 | +4.3 | 5-8 | 9-4 | 74.3 | 34.5 | 40.0% | 40.4 | 77.8 | 35.3 | 42.5% | 45.5 | Last 5 Games | 0-5 | -5 | 1-4 | 3-2 | 74.2 | 37.0 | 43.0% | 36.2 | 83.6 | 42.0 | 49.4% | 40.8 | Division Games | 4-14 | -5.8 | 6-12 | 10-8 | 74.3 | 37.7 | 42.6% | 37.7 | 79.8 | 40.8 | 45.2% | 42.2 |
|
| |
|
|
Team Stats (All Games) | 76.0 | 37.3 | 29-68 | 42.5% | 7-19 | 34.9% | 12-16 | 74.2% | 40 | 9 | 16 | 20 | 8 | 13 | 3 | vs opponents surrendering | 75.7 | 38.2 | 28-66 | 42.3% | 5-15 | 32.8% | 15-19 | 79.7% | 41 | 9 | 16 | 19 | 7 | 13 | 4 | Team Stats (Road Games) | 74.3 | 34.5 | 27-68 | 40.0% | 7-20 | 32.9% | 13-17 | 74.4% | 40 | 10 | 14 | 22 | 9 | 12 | 3 | Stats Against (All Games) | 77.1 | 39.0 | 28-64 | 44.2% | 5-13 | 35.2% | 16-19 | 82.8% | 42 | 9 | 16 | 16 | 7 | 15 | 4 | vs opponents averaging | 76.4 | 38.5 | 28-66 | 42.7% | 5-15 | 33.0% | 15-19 | 79.7% | 42 | 9 | 17 | 19 | 7 | 13 | 4 | Stats Against (Road Games) | 77.8 | 35.3 | 27-63 | 42.5% | 5-14 | 35.9% | 19-24 | 81.8% | 46 | 10 | 17 | 17 | 6 | 15 | 4 |
|
|
| |
|
|
All Games | 18-11 | +2.6 | 13-16 | 17-12 | 83.0 | 41.9 | 44.6% | 44.2 | 80.2 | 40.0 | 43.0% | 42.3 | Home Games | 11-3 | +5.2 | 6-8 | 10-4 | 86.8 | 42.8 | 45.6% | 45.6 | 79.4 | 39.7 | 42.7% | 40.7 | Last 5 Games | 4-1 | +3.2 | 3-2 | 3-2 | 81.8 | 43.8 | 43.5% | 47.0 | 81.0 | 40.0 | 45.1% | 40.6 | Division Games | 13-6 | +3.3 | 8-11 | 10-9 | 82.9 | 42.3 | 45.0% | 44.2 | 78.3 | 40.1 | 41.9% | 42.7 |
|
| |
|
|
Team Stats (All Games) | 83.0 | 41.9 | 32-71 | 44.6% | 4-12 | 31.5% | 16-19 | 83.0% | 44 | 10 | 15 | 19 | 6 | 12 | 7 | vs opponents surrendering | 75.1 | 38 | 28-65 | 42.4% | 5-15 | 32.6% | 15-19 | 80.1% | 41 | 9 | 16 | 19 | 7 | 13 | 4 | Team Stats (Home Games) | 86.8 | 42.8 | 33-71 | 45.6% | 4-13 | 34.4% | 17-20 | 86.0% | 46 | 10 | 18 | 18 | 6 | 11 | 8 | Stats Against (All Games) | 80.2 | 40.0 | 30-70 | 43.0% | 5-15 | 35.4% | 15-19 | 77.1% | 42 | 9 | 18 | 19 | 7 | 12 | 4 | vs opponents averaging | 75.5 | 38 | 28-65 | 42.5% | 5-15 | 33.6% | 15-19 | 78.8% | 41 | 9 | 17 | 19 | 7 | 13 | 4 | Stats Against (Home Games) | 79.4 | 39.7 | 30-70 | 42.7% | 5-16 | 34.7% | 14-18 | 75.8% | 41 | 8 | 20 | 18 | 7 | 11 | 5 |
|
| Average power rating of opponents played: CONNECTICUT 70.1, CHICAGO 70.5 |
| | |
|
|
7/22/2015 | @ MINNESOTA | 78-77 | W | +280 | 30-72 | 41.7% | 42 | 15 | 29-75 | 38.7% | 50 | 16 | 7/28/2015 | INDIANA | 73-75 | L | -115 | 28-65 | 43.1% | 37 | 18 | 33-81 | 40.7% | 52 | 13 | 7/31/2015 | SEATTLE | 67-66 | W | -300 | 24-63 | 38.1% | 47 | 16 | 24-61 | 39.3% | 40 | 15 | 8/2/2015 | @ INDIANA | 70-83 | L | +200 | 25-55 | 45.5% | 33 | 12 | 25-59 | 42.4% | 43 | 13 | 8/4/2015 | SAN ANTONIO | 82-51 | W | -165 | 36-75 | 48.0% | 50 | 17 | 23-55 | 41.8% | 29 | 21 | 8/7/2015 | WASHINGTON | 86-72 | W | +105 | 35-65 | 53.8% | 40 | 9 | 25-60 | 41.7% | 34 | 11 | 8/9/2015 | @ WASHINGTON | 73-84 | L | +220 | 22-64 | 34.4% | 38 | 8 | 25-51 | 49.0% | 40 | 11 | 8/12/2015 | TULSA | 80-74 | W | -175 | 31-73 | 42.5% | 43 | 10 | 28-65 | 43.1% | 39 | 13 | 8/14/2015 | NEW YORK | 78-90 | L | +175 | 29-57 | 50.9% | 36 | 17 | 37-73 | 50.7% | 33 | 7 | 8/16/2015 | @ ATLANTA | 77-90 | L | +145 | 27-68 | 39.7% | 33 | 14 | 27-59 | 45.8% | 47 | 12 | 8/21/2015 | @ TULSA | 76-84 | L | +180 | 30-68 | 44.1% | 44 | 14 | 29-68 | 42.6% | 44 | 10 | 8/23/2015 | ATLANTA | 92-102 | L | +120 | 34-70 | 48.6% | 35 | 12 | 40-67 | 59.7% | 34 | 15 | 8/25/2015 | @ ATLANTA | 57-71 | L | +250 | 19-63 | 30.2% | 40 | 12 | 26-66 | 39.4% | 49 | 9 | 8/27/2015 | PHOENIX | 80-81 | L | +250 | 31-69 | 44.9% | 33 | 8 | 28-56 | 50.0% | 42 | 16 | 8/29/2015 | NEW YORK | 66-80 | L | +220 | 27-58 | 46.6% | 29 | 18 | 33-59 | 55.9% | 35 | 15 | 8/30/2015 | @ CHICAGO | | | | | | | | | | | | 9/1/2015 | @ INDIANA | | | | | | | | | | | | 9/4/2015 | @ SAN ANTONIO | | | | | | | | | | | | 9/9/2015 | @ NEW YORK | | | | | | | | | | | | 9/13/2015 | CHICAGO | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
| |
|
|
7/21/2015 | ATLANTA | 97-92 | W | -500 | 32-65 | 49.2% | 42 | 15 | 37-71 | 52.1% | 33 | 14 | 7/28/2015 | @ PHOENIX | 87-89 | L | +155 | 33-86 | 38.4% | 53 | 12 | 32-70 | 45.7% | 43 | 13 | 7/31/2015 | LOS ANGELES | 77-88 | L | -210 | 28-67 | 41.8% | 37 | 9 | 32-66 | 48.5% | 42 | 6 | 8/2/2015 | WASHINGTON | 71-68 | W | -220 | 27-69 | 39.1% | 50 | 6 | 25-70 | 35.7% | 41 | 5 | 8/4/2015 | INDIANA | 106-82 | W | -220 | 43-68 | 63.2% | 42 | 14 | 26-75 | 34.7% | 42 | 13 | 8/7/2015 | NEW YORK | 63-77 | L | -200 | 20-67 | 29.9% | 43 | 13 | 27-65 | 41.5% | 52 | 14 | 8/9/2015 | PHOENIX | 74-64 | W | -175 | 27-78 | 34.6% | 54 | 7 | 25-66 | 37.9% | 44 | 9 | 8/11/2015 | @ NEW YORK | 63-84 | L | +220 | 29-70 | 41.4% | 35 | 17 | 33-65 | 50.8% | 42 | 14 | 8/14/2015 | @ SEATTLE | 94-84 | W | -250 | 34-74 | 45.9% | 46 | 6 | 29-60 | 48.3% | 36 | 11 | 8/16/2015 | @ LOS ANGELES | 64-76 | L | +145 | 23-71 | 32.4% | 49 | 9 | 30-62 | 48.4% | 41 | 11 | 8/21/2015 | WASHINGTON | 87-85 | W | -220 | 37-79 | 46.8% | 49 | 15 | 37-73 | 50.7% | 34 | 12 | 8/23/2015 | @ WASHINGTON | 66-64 | W | +120 | 24-62 | 38.7% | 46 | 15 | 22-66 | 33.3% | 47 | 16 | 8/29/2015 | @ ATLANTA | 98-96 | W | -115 | 37-70 | 52.9% | 45 | 10 | 33-74 | 44.6% | 45 | 6 | 8/30/2015 | CONNECTICUT | | | | | | | | | | | | 9/3/2015 | @ NEW YORK | | | | | | | | | | | | 9/6/2015 | SEATTLE | | | | | | | | | | | | 9/11/2015 | TULSA | | | | | | | | | | | | 9/13/2015 | @ CONNECTICUT | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
| | |
CHICAGO is 18-19 (+2.9 Units) against the money line versus CONNECTICUT since 1997 |
| |
CHICAGO is 9-2 (+6.0 Units) against the money line versus CONNECTICUT over the last 3 seasons |
|
|
|
| |
CHICAGO is 11-9 (+1.1 Units) against the money line versus CONNECTICUT since 1997 |
| |
CHICAGO is 5-0 (+5.0 Units) against the money line versus CONNECTICUT over the last 3 seasons |
|
|
|
| |
|
7/12/2015 | CONNECTICUT | 76 | 157 | Over | 41 | 28-62 | 45.2% | 6-20 | 30.0% | 14-20 | 70.0% | 30 | 4 | 9 | | CHICAGO | 96 | -8 | SU ATS | 49 | 38-67 | 56.7% | 9-18 | 50.0% | 11-13 | 84.6% | 41 | 9 | 10 | 7/2/2015 | CHICAGO | 77 | -4 | SU Under | 38 | 29-62 | 46.8% | 5-14 | 35.7% | 14-15 | 93.3% | 36 | 8 | 15 | | CONNECTICUT | 74 | 154 | ATS | 42 | 30-74 | 40.5% | 5-19 | 26.3% | 9-10 | 90.0% | 43 | 10 | 14 | 6/11/2015 | CHICAGO | 65 | -4.5 | Under | 38 | 25-69 | 36.2% | 0-6 | 0.0% | 15-18 | 83.3% | 45 | 10 | 11 | | CONNECTICUT | 67 | 156 | SU ATS | 39 | 26-67 | 38.8% | 3-11 | 27.3% | 12-18 | 66.7% | 49 | 9 | 10 | 8/5/2014 | CHICAGO | 82 | -4 | SU ATS | 36 | 26-56 | 46.4% | 2-9 | 22.2% | 28-30 | 93.3% | 46 | 6 | 14 | | CONNECTICUT | 66 | 154.5 | Under | 41 | 25-76 | 32.9% | 2-16 | 12.5% | 14-17 | 82.4% | 40 | 13 | 8 | 6/25/2014 | CHICAGO | 69 | 162 | Under | 45 | 28-67 | 41.8% | 3-12 | 25.0% | 10-11 | 90.9% | 33 | 8 | 12 | | CONNECTICUT | 79 | -1.5 | SU ATS | 39 | 28-73 | 38.4% | 6-20 | 30.0% | 17-20 | 85.0% | 55 | 21 | 14 | 5/30/2014 | CONNECTICUT | 82 | 146 | Over | 41 | 31-78 | 39.7% | 2-12 | 16.7% | 18-23 | 78.3% | 48 | 16 | 10 | | CHICAGO | 101 | -8.5 | SU ATS | 51 | 39-74 | 52.7% | 5-10 | 50.0% | 18-27 | 66.7% | 48 | 14 | 9 | 5/21/2014 | CONNECTICUT | 68 | 147.5 | Under | 26 | 24-68 | 35.3% | 3-9 | 33.3% | 17-21 | 81.0% | 35 | 10 | 11 | | CHICAGO | 78 | -5 | SU ATS | 45 | 31-60 | 51.7% | 3-9 | 33.3% | 13-14 | 92.9% | 43 | 5 | 17 |
|
| | |
|
Pokey is 53-61 against the money line (-30.6 Units) when playing 5 or less games in 14 days as the coach of CHICAGO. The average score was CHICAGO 77.0, OPPONENT 77.5 - (Rating = 1*) | Pokey is 39-44 against the money line (-18.8 Units) after one or more consecutive overs as the coach of CHICAGO. The average score was CHICAGO 76.5, OPPONENT 77.1 - (Rating = 0*) | Pokey is 22-26 against the money line (-18.9 Units) after having won 4 or 5 of their last 6 games as the coach of CHICAGO. The average score was CHICAGO 75.7, OPPONENT 77.3 - (Rating = 1*) | Pokey is 47-52 against the money line (-22.4 Units) after allowing 75 points or more as the coach of CHICAGO. The average score was CHICAGO 76.3, OPPONENT 77.1 - (Rating = 1*) | Pokey is 32-38 against the money line (-18.2 Units) after allowing 80 points or more as the coach of CHICAGO. The average score was CHICAGO 76.2, OPPONENT 77.5 - (Rating = 1*) | Pokey is 28-36 against the money line (-18.4 Units) after scoring 80 points or more as the coach of CHICAGO. The average score was CHICAGO 75.5, OPPONENT 77.2 - (Rating = 1*) | Pokey is 10-15 against the money line (-13.1 Units) after scoring 90 points or more as the coach of CHICAGO. The average score was CHICAGO 79.3, OPPONENT 80.6 - (Rating = 1*) | Pokey is 8-13 against the money line (-12.2 Units) after a combined score of 175 points or more as the coach of CHICAGO. The average score was CHICAGO 77.8, OPPONENT 81.7 - (Rating = 1*) | Pokey is 20-36 against the money line (-22.5 Units) versus good 3 point shooting teams - making >=33% of their attempts after 15+ games as the coach of CHICAGO. The average score was CHICAGO 73.6, OPPONENT 77.1 - (Rating = 2*) | Pokey is 34-51 against the money line (-28.2 Units) versus good 3 point shooting teams - making >=33% of their attempts as the coach of CHICAGO. The average score was CHICAGO 75.3, OPPONENT 77.9 - (Rating = 2*) | Pokey is 14-22 against the money line (-15.9 Units) versus teams who attempt 16 or more 3 point shots/game on the season after 15+ games as the coach of CHICAGO. The average score was CHICAGO 72.4, OPPONENT 75.1 - (Rating = 1*) | Pokey is 24-38 against the money line (-35.2 Units) versus teams who attempt 16 or more 3 point shots/game on the season as the coach of CHICAGO. The average score was CHICAGO 74.6, OPPONENT 76.4 - (Rating = 4*) | Pokey is 21-32 against the money line (-17.5 Units) versus teams who make 5 or more 3 point shots/game on the season after 15+ games as the coach of CHICAGO. The average score was CHICAGO 73.5, OPPONENT 76.1 - (Rating = 1*) | Pokey is 31-46 against the money line (-32.2 Units) versus teams who make 5 or more 3 point shots/game on the season as the coach of CHICAGO. The average score was CHICAGO 75.2, OPPONENT 77.2 - (Rating = 2*) | Pokey is 67-72 against the money line (-23.6 Units) versus up-tempo teams averaging 62 or more shots/game as the coach of CHICAGO. The average score was CHICAGO 76.9, OPPONENT 77.3 - (Rating = 0*) | Pokey is 70-76 against the money line (-27.0 Units) versus poor foul drawing teams - attempting <=24 free throws/game as the coach of CHICAGO. The average score was CHICAGO 77.0, OPPONENT 77.4 - (Rating = 1*) | Pokey is 18-25 against the money line (-18.4 Units) versus poor defensive teams - shooting pct defense of >=44% as the coach of CHICAGO. The average score was CHICAGO 74.7, OPPONENT 75.6 - (Rating = 1*) | Pokey is 29-34 against the money line (-17.4 Units) versus poor defensive teams - allowing 77+ points/game as the coach of CHICAGO. The average score was CHICAGO 76.7, OPPONENT 77.3 - (Rating = 1*) | Pokey is 17-30 against the money line (-16.9 Units) versus good ball handling teams - committing <=14 turnovers/game after 15+ games as the coach of CHICAGO. The average score was CHICAGO 74.6, OPPONENT 77.6 - (Rating = 1*) | Pokey is 27-40 against the money line (-20.9 Units) versus good ball handling teams - committing <=14 turnovers/game as the coach of CHICAGO. The average score was CHICAGO 76.4, OPPONENT 78.4 - (Rating = 1*) |
|
|
Anne is 6-14 against the money line (-10.7 Units) when playing their 3rd game in 5 days as the coach of CONNECTICUT. The average score was CONNECTICUT 73.8, OPPONENT 77.5 - (Rating = 1*) | Anne is 14-28 against the money line (-14.7 Units) after failing to cover 2 of their last 3 against the spread as the coach of CONNECTICUT. The average score was CONNECTICUT 75.2, OPPONENT 79.5 - (Rating = 0*) | Anne is 2-13 against the money line (-14.7 Units) after failing to cover 4 of their last 5 against the spread as the coach of CONNECTICUT. The average score was CONNECTICUT 70.3, OPPONENT 76.9 - (Rating = 5*) | Anne is 10-34 against the money line (-22.0 Units) in road games after allowing 70 points or more in 4 straight games in all games he has coached since 1997. The average score was Anne 73.2, OPPONENT 78.3 - (Rating = 1*) | Anne is 7-26 against the money line (-17.4 Units) in road games after allowing 70 points or more in 5 straight games in all games he has coached since 1997. The average score was Anne 72.8, OPPONENT 78.0 - (Rating = 0*) | Anne is 16-37 against the money line (-21.0 Units) after allowing 75 points or more as the coach of CONNECTICUT. The average score was CONNECTICUT 73.4, OPPONENT 78.1 - (Rating = 1*) | Anne is 9-23 against the money line (-13.7 Units) after allowing 75 points or more in 2 straight games as the coach of CONNECTICUT. The average score was CONNECTICUT 73.4, OPPONENT 77.4 - (Rating = 0*) | Anne is 0-10 against the money line (-12.3 Units) after allowing 80 points or more in 2 straight games as the coach of CONNECTICUT. The average score was CONNECTICUT 68.8, OPPONENT 78.1 - (Rating = 0*) | Anne is 2-9 against the money line (-8.0 Units) after allowing 40 points or more in the first half in 2 straight games as the coach of CONNECTICUT. The average score was CONNECTICUT 69.8, OPPONENT 79.2 - (Rating = 1*) | Anne is 10-22 against the money line (-14.5 Units) after a loss by 10 points or more as the coach of CONNECTICUT. The average score was CONNECTICUT 75.3, OPPONENT 78.6 - (Rating = 1*) | Anne is 16-31 against the money line (-16.2 Units) after a game where they failed to cover the spread as the coach of CONNECTICUT. The average score was CONNECTICUT 75.6, OPPONENT 78.5 - (Rating = 1*) | Anne is 14-38 against the money line (-18.8 Units) versus up-tempo teams averaging 62 or more shots/game after 15+ games as the coach of CONNECTICUT. The average score was CONNECTICUT 72.8, OPPONENT 77.9 - (Rating = 0*) | Anne is 23-51 against the money line (-22.2 Units) versus up-tempo teams averaging 62 or more shots/game as the coach of CONNECTICUT. The average score was CONNECTICUT 74.2, OPPONENT 78.3 - (Rating = 1*) | Anne is 24-52 against the money line (-20.6 Units) versus poor foul drawing teams - attempting <=24 free throws/game as the coach of CONNECTICUT. The average score was CONNECTICUT 74.1, OPPONENT 78.4 - (Rating = 0*) | Anne is 35-57 against the money line (-26.3 Units) versus teams who average 42 or more rebounds/game on the season after 15+ games in all games he has coached since 1997. The average score was Anne 75.3, OPPONENT 77.9 - (Rating = 0*) | Anne is 9-30 against the money line (-18.0 Units) versus teams who average 42 or more rebounds/game on the season as the coach of CONNECTICUT. The average score was CONNECTICUT 73.2, OPPONENT 79.9 - (Rating = 1*) | Anne is 12-34 against the money line (-18.7 Units) versus terrible defensive teams - allowing 73+ points/game after 15+ games as the coach of CONNECTICUT. The average score was CONNECTICUT 72.8, OPPONENT 77.5 - (Rating = 1*) | Anne is 4-23 against the money line (-17.0 Units) in road games versus terrible defensive teams - allowing 73+ points/game as the coach of CONNECTICUT. The average score was CONNECTICUT 70.8, OPPONENT 78.4 - (Rating = 1*) | Anne is 5-19 against the money line (-14.6 Units) versus poor defensive teams - allowing 77+ points/game after 15+ games as the coach of CONNECTICUT. The average score was CONNECTICUT 72.1, OPPONENT 76.5 - (Rating = 2*) | Anne is 9-23 against the money line (-14.9 Units) versus poor defensive teams - allowing 77+ points/game as the coach of CONNECTICUT. The average score was CONNECTICUT 74.2, OPPONENT 77.8 - (Rating = 1*) | Anne is 10-35 against the money line (-20.6 Units) versus explosive offensive teams - scoring 73+ points/game after 15+ games as the coach of CONNECTICUT. The average score was CONNECTICUT 72.7, OPPONENT 79.5 - (Rating = 1*) | Anne is 17-45 against the money line (-22.8 Units) versus explosive offensive teams - scoring 73+ points/game as the coach of CONNECTICUT. The average score was CONNECTICUT 74.5, OPPONENT 79.8 - (Rating = 1*) | Pokey is 66-49 against the money line (+9.4 Units) vs. division opponents as the coach of CHICAGO. The average score was CHICAGO 77.0, OPPONENT 75.4 - (Rating = 0*) | Pokey is 17-9 against the money line (+7.9 Units) after having won 4 of their last 5 games as the coach of CHICAGO. The average score was CHICAGO 79.1, OPPONENT 77.3 - (Rating = 0*) |
|
| | |
|
Since 1997, the home favorite won the game straight up 5 times, while the road underdog won straight up 1 times. No Edge. | Over the last 3 seasons, the home favorite won the game straight up 1 times, while the road underdog won straight up 1 times. No Edge. |
|
| | |
[G] 08/24/2015 - Alex Bentley out indefinitely ( Ankle ) | [F] 08/15/2015 - Alyssa Thomas out indefinitely ( Shoulder ) | [C] 08/13/2015 - Elizabeth Williams out indefinitely ( Knee ) | [G] 06/05/2015 - Allison Hightower out for season ( Suspension ) | [F] 06/05/2015 - Kelsey Griffin out for season ( Hip ) | [F] 06/04/2015 - Chiney Ogwumike out for season ( Knee ) | |
[G] 08/30/2015 - Elena Delle Donne missed last game, doubtful Sunday vs. Connecticut Sun ( Foot ) |
|
|
| Last Updated: 5/4/2024 9:10:07 AM EST. |
|
|
| |
|