| | | WNBA : Money Line Matchup |
| |
WASHINGTON
TULSA |
|
|
156
| 91
Final
74 |
|
|
| | |
|
| |  | |
| 653 | WASHINGTON | +145 | | 654 | TULSA | -165 |
|
|
|  | |
|
| | | 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. |
|
| | |
|
 - Home favorites vs. the money line (TULSA) - after failing to cover 4 or 5 of their last 6 against the spread, with a losing record.
(225-93 since 1997.) (70.8%, +69.9 units. Rating = 2*) | - Favorites vs. the money line (TULSA) - after failing to cover 4 or 5 of their last 6 against the spread, with a losing record.
(244-105 since 1997.) (69.9%, +69.3 units. Rating = 2*) | - Favorites vs. the money line (TULSA) - good free throw shooting team - making >=76% of their free throws, on Saturday games.
(67-13 over the last 5 seasons.) (83.8%, +40.2 units. Rating = 3*) | - Home favorites vs. the money line (TULSA) - after failing to cover 5 or 6 of their last 7 against the spread, with a losing record.
(151-58 since 1997.) (72.2%, +56.6 units. Rating = 2*) | - Favorites vs. the money line (TULSA) - after failing to cover 5 or 6 of their last 7 against the spread, with a losing record.
(160-66 since 1997.) (70.8%, +53.1 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home favorites vs. the money line (TULSA) - after failing to cover 4 or 5 of their last 6 against the spread, with a losing record after 15 or more games.
(138-53 since 1997.) (72.3%, +52 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home favorites vs. the money line (TULSA) - after failing to cover 5 or 6 of their last 7 against the spread, with a losing record after 15 or more games.
(98-29 since 1997.) (77.2%, +51.5 units. Rating = 3*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - an explosive offensive team (>=76 PPG) against a good offensive team (72-76 PPG), after scoring 75 points or more in 3 straight games.
(49-17 over the last 5 seasons.) (74.2%, +24.7 units. Rating = 2*) | - Favorites vs. the money line (TULSA) - after failing to cover 5 or 6 of their last 7 against the spread, with a losing record after 15 or more games.
(103-34 since 1997.) (75.2%, +47.8 units. Rating = 3*) | - Favorites vs. the money line (TULSA) - an explosive offensive team (>=76 PPG) against a good offensive team (72-76 PPG), after scoring 75 points or more in 3 straight games.
(103-27 since 1997.) (79.2%, +45.8 units. Rating = 2*) |  - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - off an upset win as an underdog, a bad team, winning 25% to 40% of their games after 15 or more games.
(104-46 since 1997.) (69.3%, +45.2 units. Rating = 3*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - an explosive offensive team (>=76 PPG) against a good offensive team (72-76 PPG), after scoring 75 points or more in 4 straight games.
(101-47 since 1997.) (68.2%, +45.1 units. Rating = 3*) | - Favorites vs. the money line (TULSA) - an explosive offensive team (>=76 PPG) against a good offensive team (72-76 PPG), after scoring 75 points or more in 4 straight games.
(82-20 since 1997.) (80.4%, +40.5 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - good shooting team (43.5-46%) against an average defensive team (40.5-43.5%), good rebounding team (+3 to +6 reb/game) against an average rebounding team (+/-3 reb/game).
(82-32 since 1997.) (71.9%, +35.3 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - an explosive offensive team (>=76 PPG) against a good offensive team (72-76 PPG) after 15+ games, after scoring 75 points or more in 3 straight games.
(87-41 since 1997.) (68%, +35.2 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - off a win against a division rival, a bad team, winning 25% to 40% of their games after 15 or more games.
(32-11 over the last 5 seasons.) (74.4%, +20.6 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - good shooting team (43.5-46%) against an average defensive team (40.5-43.5%), good rebounding team (+3 to +6 Reb/G) vs. an average rebounding team (+/-3 Reb/G) after 15+ games.
(65-20 since 1997.) (76.5%, +34.2 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - good shooting team (43.5-46%) against an average defensive team (40.5-43.5%) after 15+ games, good rebounding team (+3 to +6 reb/game) against an average rebounding team (+/-3 reb/game).
(65-20 since 1997.) (76.5%, +34.2 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - good shooting team (43.5-46%) against an average defensive team (40.5-43.5%) after 15+ games, good rebounding team (+3 to +6 Reb/G) vs. an average rebounding team (+/-3 Reb/G) after 15+ games.
(65-20 since 1997.) (76.5%, +34.2 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - after 1 or more consecutive wins, a bad team (25% to 40%) playing a team with a losing record after 15 or more games.
(76-48 since 1997.) (61.3%, +29.8 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - an explosive offensive team (>=76 PPG) against a good offensive team (72-76 PPG) after 15+ games, after scoring 75 points or more in 4 straight games.
(71-31 since 1997.) (69.6%, +29.5 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - off an upset win as a road underdog, a bad team, winning 25% to 40% of their games after 15 or more games.
(56-25 since 1997.) (69.1%, +28.9 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - off an upset win over a division rival as an underdog, a bad team, winning 25% to 40% of their games after 15 or more games.
(21-5 over the last 5 seasons.) (80.8%, +17.4 units. Rating = 3*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - after failing to cover 4 or 5 of their last 6 against the spread, tired team - playing their 3rd game in 5 days.
(44-20 over the last 5 seasons.) (68.8%, +25.8 units. Rating = 3*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - an explosive offensive team (>=76 PPG) against a good offensive team (72-76 PPG), after scoring 75 points or more.
(90-35 over the last 5 seasons.) (72%, +39.1 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - after allowing 75 points or more in 5 straight games against opponent after scoring 40 points or more in the first half in 2 straight games.
(23-16 over the last 5 seasons.) (59%, +24.2 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - off a road win, with a winning percentage of between 40-49% after 15 or more games.
(33-15 over the last 5 seasons.) (68.8%, +27.4 units. Rating = 3*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - an explosive offensive team (>=76 PPG) against a good offensive team (72-76 PPG), after scoring 80 points or more.
(72-24 over the last 5 seasons.) (75%, +36.8 units. Rating = 3*) |
|
|
- Home teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - poor defensive team - allowing 73+ points/game on the season, in May, June, or July games.
(461-496 since 1997.) (48.2%, +104.1 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - poor defensive team - allowing 73+ points/game on the season, in July games.
(259-260 since 1997.) (49.9%, +99.7 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - terrible defensive team - allowing 77+ points/game on the season, after a combined score of 155 points or more.
(137-112 over the last 5 seasons.) (55%, +59.2 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - poor defensive team - allowing 73+ points/game on the season, after a combined score of 165 points or more.
(229-233 since 1997.) (49.6%, +83.2 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - in non-conference games, off a home loss.
(281-197 since 1997.) (58.8%, +76 units. Rating = 2*) | - Road teams vs. the money line (WASHINGTON) - excellent free throw shooting team - making >=80% of their free throws.
(244-225 since 1997.) (52%, +75.1 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - terrible defensive team - allowing 77+ points/game on the season, after allowing 80 points or more.
(136-100 over the last 5 seasons.) (57.6%, +58.8 units. Rating = 3*) | - Road teams vs. the money line (WASHINGTON) - long range shooting team - attempting 16 or more 3 point shots/game, in July games.
(156-169 since 1997.) (48%, +70.6 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - terrible defensive team - allowing 77+ points/game on the season, after a combined score of 165 points or more.
(89-66 over the last 5 seasons.) (57.4%, +50.3 units. Rating = 3*) | - Road teams vs. the money line (WASHINGTON) - good free throw shooting team - making >=76% of their free throws, in July games.
(78-58 over the last 5 seasons.) (57.4%, +63.6 units. Rating = 4*) | - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - after having lost 2 of their last 3 games, with a winning percentage of between 40-49% after 15 or more games.
(219-175 since 1997.) (55.6%, +61.3 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - terrible defensive team - allowing 77+ points/game on the season, in July games.
(136-119 since 1997.) (53.3%, +58.3 units. Rating = 2*) | - Road teams vs. the money line (WASHINGTON) - poor defensive team - allowing 73+ points/game on the season against opponent after a combined score of 165 points or more.
(103-94 over the last 5 seasons.) (52.3%, +51.5 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - in non-conference games, off a home loss against a division rival.
(158-114 since 1997.) (58.1%, +49.7 units. Rating = 2*) | - Road teams vs. the money line (WASHINGTON) - excellent free throw shooting team - making >=80% of their free throws, in July games.
(72-53 since 1997.) (57.6%, +48.5 units. Rating = 3*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - poor defensive team - allowing 73+ points/game on the season, after allowing 90 points or more.
(66-45 over the last 5 seasons.) (59.5%, +39.3 units. Rating = 3*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - in non-conference games, off 2 or more consecutive home losses.
(69-28 since 1997.) (71.1%, +42.5 units. Rating = 4*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - after allowing 90 points or more.
(79-53 over the last 5 seasons.) (59.8%, +47.6 units. Rating = 3*) | - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - after having lost 2 of their last 3 games, a marginal losing team (40% to 49%) playing a losing team after 15 or more games.
(32-12 over the last 5 seasons.) (72.7%, +18.7 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - good offensive team - scoring 73+ points/game on the season, after allowing 90 points or more.
(59-42 over the last 5 seasons.) (58.4%, +39.4 units. Rating = 3*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - with a losing record after 15 or more games, in July games.
(47-24 over the last 5 seasons.) (66.2%, +33.6 units. Rating = 3*) | - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - after having lost 3 of their last 4 games, a marginal losing team (40% to 49%) playing a bad team (25-40%) after 15 or more games.
(36-12 since 1997.) (75%, +26.5 units. Rating = 4*) | - Road teams vs. the money line (WASHINGTON) - poor defensive team - allowing 73+ points/game on the season against opponent after allowing 90 points or more.
(62-40 over the last 5 seasons.) (60.8%, +42.4 units. Rating = 3*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - after 3 straight losses by 6 points or less.
(31-13 since 1997.) (70.5%, +24.3 units. Rating = 3*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - good shooting team (43.5-46%) against an average shooting team (40.5-43.5%) after 15+ games, after 4 straight games - allowing a shooting pct. of 42% or higher.
(31-14 since 1997.) (68.9%, +24.2 units. Rating = 3*) | - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - after having lost 2 of their last 3 games, a marginal losing team (40% to 49%) playing a bad team (25-40%) after 15 or more games.
(45-17 since 1997.) (72.6%, +23.7 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - after failing to cover 3 of their last 4 against the spread, a marginal losing team (40% to 49%) playing a bad team (25-40%) after 15 or more games.
(34-10 since 1997.) (77.3%, +23.7 units. Rating = 3*) | - Home favorites of -165 to -500 vs. the money line (TULSA) - after allowing 90 points or more.
(35-31 over the last 5 seasons.) (53%, +39.2 units. Rating = 4*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - with a losing record after 15 or more games, in May, June, or July games.
(48-26 over the last 5 seasons.) (64.9%, +31.1 units. Rating = 3*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - poor defensive team - shooting pct defense of >=44% on the season, after a game - allowing a shooting pct. of 55% or higher.
(35-18 since 1997.) (66%, +19.6 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - after allowing 90 points or more against opponent after scoring 70 points or more in 2 straight games.
(45-25 over the last 5 seasons.) (64.3%, +28.8 units. Rating = 3*) | - Home favorites vs. the money line (TULSA) - after allowing 90 points or more.
(47-43 over the last 5 seasons.) (52.2%, +41 units. Rating = 3*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - an excellent offensive team (>=76 PPG) against a poor defensive team (72-76 PPG), after a combined score of 150 points or more in 4 straight games.
(31-15 over the last 5 seasons.) (67.4%, +29.5 units. Rating = 4*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - an excellent offensive team (>=76 PPG) against a poor defensive team (72-76 PPG) after 15+ games, after a combined score of 150 points or more in 4 straight games.
(23-12 over the last 5 seasons.) (65.7%, +19.4 units. Rating = 2*) | - Road teams vs. the money line (WASHINGTON) - off a win against a division rival, in July games.
(36-16 over the last 5 seasons.) (69.2%, +28.9 units. Rating = 3*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - after a home game where both teams score 75 or more points against opponent off an upset win as a road underdog.
(36-16 over the last 5 seasons.) (69.2%, +18.8 units. Rating = 1*) | - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - off an upset win as an underdog against opponent after a home game where both teams score 75 or more points.
(42-21 over the last 5 seasons.) (66.7%, +18.6 units. Rating = 1*) | - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - off a road win, on Saturday games.
(38-26 over the last 5 seasons.) (59.4%, +16 units. Rating = 1*) |
|
| | |
|
| WASHINGTON | 75 | | 28-66 | 42.7% | 5-17 | 30.9% | 13-17 | 79.4% | 44 | 10 | 14 | | TULSA | 80 | | 29-71 | 41.4% | 6-18 | 32.5% | 15-20 | 77.2% | 46 | 13 | 11 |
| | 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, TULSA won the game straight up 623 times, while WASHINGTON won 352 times.
No Edge. |
|
|
| Potential StatFox Money Line Power Trends to watch out for:
| |
TULSA is 10-26 against the money line (-17.6 Units) in up-tempo games where they attempt 84 or more shots over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 80.1, OPPONENT 84.2 | TULSA is 1-7 against the money line (-7.0 Units) when they make 40% to 44% of their shots in a game this season.
The average score was TULSA 76.1, OPPONENT 79.4 | TULSA is 3-12 against the money line (-9.9 Units) when they make 29% to 35% of their three point attempts in a game over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 74.8, OPPONENT 79.2 | TULSA is 2-13 against the money line (-11.7 Units) when their opponents make 29% to 35% of their 3 pointers in a game over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 75.2, OPPONENT 81.6 | TULSA is 4-14 against the money line (-11.8 Units) when they attempt 17 to 22 free throws in a game over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 76.3, OPPONENT 81.5 | TULSA is 14-52 against the money line (-31.0 Units) in games where they force 13 to 18 turnovers since 1997.
The average score was TULSA 76.7, OPPONENT 85.5 |
|
WASHINGTON is 80-140 against the money line (-50.9 Units) in up-tempo games where they attempt 84 or more shots since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 74.8, OPPONENT 78.3 | WASHINGTON is 68-99 against the money line (-40.5 Units) when they make 40% to 44% of their shots in a game since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 71.0, OPPONENT 73.2 | WASHINGTON is 113-184 against the money line (-73.1 Units) when they grab 8 to 12 offensive rebounds in a game since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.4, OPPONENT 74.2 | WASHINGTON is 19-78 against the money line (-58.2 Units) when they allow 78 to 82 points in a game since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 72.2, OPPONENT 79.7 | WASHINGTON is 5-34 against the money line (-23.8 Units) when they allow 78 or more points in a game over the last 3 seasons.
The average score was WASHINGTON 76.1, OPPONENT 85.7 | WASHINGTON is 53-126 against the money line (-67.3 Units) in games where they force 12 or fewer turnovers since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 69.5, OPPONENT 75.5 | WASHINGTON is 44-102 against the money line (-59.4 Units) when they commit 3 to 6 more turnovers than their opponents since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.0, OPPONENT 75.8 | WASHINGTON is 58-98 against the money line (-39.3 Units) when they have the around same number of rebounds as their opponents in a game since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.5, OPPONENT 74.1 | TULSA is 20-18 against the money line (+15.9 Units) when they score 78 or more points in a game over the last 3 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 87.3, OPPONENT 85.3 |
|
| | |
|
TULSA is 9-17 against the money line (-10.8 Units) when playing against a team with a losing record over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 75.5, OPPONENT 76.7 - (Rating = 0*) | TULSA is 4-9 against the money line (-9.0 Units) when playing against a team with a losing record after 15+ games after 15+ games over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 75.6, OPPONENT 76.5 - (Rating = 0*) | TULSA is 1-6 against the money line (-7.1 Units) when playing against a marginal losing team (Win Pct. 40% to 49%) after 15+ games over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 73.6, OPPONENT 77.3 - (Rating = 0*) | TULSA is 2-8 against the money line (-9.7 Units) versus teams who attempt 16 or more 3 point shots/game on the season after 15+ games over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 71.0, OPPONENT 74.3 - (Rating = 2*) | TULSA is 5-27 against the money line (-20.6 Units) vs. excellent free throw shooting teams - making >=80% of their shots since 1997.
The average score was TULSA 76.8, OPPONENT 86.7 - (Rating = 1*) | TULSA is 5-14 against the money line (-11.2 Units) versus poor foul drawing teams - attempting <=24 free throws/game after 15+ games over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 77.4, OPPONENT 79.1 - (Rating = 2*) | TULSA is 3-9 against the money line (-9.1 Units) versus poor pressure defensive teams - forcing <=14 turnovers/game after 15+ games over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 75.8, OPPONENT 78.3 - (Rating = 1*) | TULSA is 5-13 against the money line (-9.5 Units) versus terrible defensive teams - allowing 73+ points/game after 15+ games over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 78.3, OPPONENT 79.5 - (Rating = 1*) | TULSA is 1-8 against the money line (-8.2 Units) versus teams who average 7 or less steals/game on the season after 15+ games over the last 3 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 72.9, OPPONENT 85.0 - (Rating = 1*) |
|
|
WASHINGTON is 108-132 against the money line (-53.9 Units) when playing against a team with a losing record since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.5, OPPONENT 71.7 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 54-74 against the money line (-42.7 Units) when playing against a team with a losing record after 15+ games after 15+ games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 69.8, OPPONENT 72.0 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 52-85 against the money line (-33.8 Units) versus teams who make 5 or more 3 point shots/game on the season after 15+ games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.1, OPPONENT 74.4 - (Rating = 0*) | WASHINGTON is 65-108 against the money line (-40.7 Units) versus up-tempo teams averaging 62 or more shots/game after 15+ games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 72.5, OPPONENT 76.7 - (Rating = 0*) | WASHINGTON is 23-46 against the money line (-21.1 Units) versus up-tempo teams averaging 62 or more shots/game over the last 3 seasons.
The average score was WASHINGTON 71.5, OPPONENT 76.0 - (Rating = 0*) | WASHINGTON is 47-82 against the money line (-35.1 Units) vs. good free throw shooting teams - making >=76% of their attempts after 15+ games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.2, OPPONENT 74.0 - (Rating = 0*) | WASHINGTON is 105-184 against the money line (-86.7 Units) versus poor foul drawing teams - attempting <=24 free throws/game after 15+ games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 68.9, OPPONENT 73.5 - (Rating = 2*) | WASHINGTON is 23-48 against the money line (-21.4 Units) versus poor foul drawing teams - attempting <=24 free throws/game over the last 3 seasons.
The average score was WASHINGTON 71.5, OPPONENT 76.3 - (Rating = 0*) | WASHINGTON is 9-21 against the money line (-13.3 Units) versus poor pressure defensive teams - forcing <=14 turnovers/game over the last 3 seasons.
The average score was WASHINGTON 74.7, OPPONENT 77.7 - (Rating = 0*) | WASHINGTON is 13-28 against the money line (-16.0 Units) versus teams who average 42 or more rebounds/game on the season over the last 3 seasons.
The average score was WASHINGTON 72.1, OPPONENT 77.4 - (Rating = 0*) | WASHINGTON is 17-37 against the money line (-20.1 Units) versus good rebounding teams - outrebounding opponents by 3+ per game after 15+ games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 72.1, OPPONENT 77.5 - (Rating = 0*) | WASHINGTON is 56-93 against the money line (-47.0 Units) versus terrible defensive teams - allowing 73+ points/game after 15+ games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 72.5, OPPONENT 77.0 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 51-98 against the money line (-46.3 Units) versus explosive offensive teams - scoring 73+ points/game after 15+ games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 72.4, OPPONENT 77.8 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 15-37 against the money line (-18.8 Units) versus explosive offensive teams - scoring 73+ points/game over the last 3 seasons.
The average score was WASHINGTON 71.8, OPPONENT 77.8 - (Rating = 0*) | WASHINGTON is 3-18 against the money line (-14.3 Units) versus good offensive teams - scoring 77+ points/game after 15+ games over the last 3 seasons.
The average score was WASHINGTON 69.2, OPPONENT 80.2 - (Rating = 0*) | WASHINGTON is 9-30 against the money line (-18.3 Units) versus good offensive teams - scoring 77+ points/game over the last 3 seasons.
The average score was WASHINGTON 71.8, OPPONENT 79.7 - (Rating = 0*) | WASHINGTON is 31-67 against the money line (-34.4 Units) versus good ball handling teams - committing <=14 turnovers/game after 15+ games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 67.2, OPPONENT 73.1 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 51-95 against the money line (-39.5 Units) versus good ball handling teams - committing <=14 turnovers/game since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 68.3, OPPONENT 72.6 - (Rating = 0*) | TULSA is 12-8 against the money line (+14.3 Units) versus teams who average 42 or more rebounds/game on the season over the last 3 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 81.8, OPPONENT 84.1 - (Rating = 2*) |
|
| | |
|
TULSA is 3-18 against the money line (-15.9 Units) in home games in July games since 1997.
The average score was TULSA 75.2, OPPONENT 83.5 - (Rating = 2*) | TULSA is 21-67 against the money line (-37.9 Units) in May, June, or July games since 1997.
The average score was TULSA 77.3, OPPONENT 84.7 - (Rating = 1*) | TULSA is 1-11 against the money line (-10.8 Units) on Saturday games over the last 3 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 75.0, OPPONENT 83.6 - (Rating = 2*) | TULSA is 1-17 against the money line (-16.4 Units) in home games after 4 straight games - allowing a shooting pct. of 42% or higher since 1997.
The average score was TULSA 76.4, OPPONENT 82.8 - (Rating = 1*) | TULSA is 2-10 against the money line (-8.9 Units) in home games after a game - allowing a shooting pct. of 50% or higher over the last 3 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 79.5, OPPONENT 86.1 - (Rating = 1*) | TULSA is 7-16 against the money line (-12.2 Units) after a game where a team made 80% of their free throws or better over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 76.5, OPPONENT 79.5 - (Rating = 1*) | TULSA is 9-20 against the money line (-11.9 Units) after one or more consecutive overs over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 78.1, OPPONENT 80.3 - (Rating = 0*) | TULSA is 6-26 against the money line (-19.3 Units) in home games off a loss against a division rival since 1997.
The average score was TULSA 79.3, OPPONENT 86.6 - (Rating = 1*) | TULSA is 1-6 against the money line (-6.0 Units) in home games after allowing 75 points or more this season.
The average score was TULSA 81.1, OPPONENT 81.4 - (Rating = 0*) | TULSA is 7-20 against the money line (-12.7 Units) after allowing 80 points or more over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 79.4, OPPONENT 83.0 - (Rating = 0*) | TULSA is 1-9 against the money line (-10.8 Units) in home games after allowing 90 points or more over the last 3 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 76.0, OPPONENT 84.4 - (Rating = 3*) | TULSA is 2-7 against the money line (-8.9 Units) in home games after scoring 70 points or more in 3 straight games over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 76.8, OPPONENT 77.4 - (Rating = 1*) | TULSA is 0-6 against the money line (-8.7 Units) in home games after scoring 70 points or more in 4 straight games over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 78.0, OPPONENT 82.2 - (Rating = 1*) | TULSA is 4-21 against the money line (-16.2 Units) after scoring 70 points or more in 5 straight games since 1997.
The average score was TULSA 76.8, OPPONENT 87.3 - (Rating = 1*) | TULSA is 1-6 against the money line (-6.0 Units) in home games after a game where both teams scored 75 points or more this season.
The average score was TULSA 81.1, OPPONENT 81.4 - (Rating = 0*) | TULSA is 1-6 against the money line (-6.0 Units) in home games after scoring 75 points or more this season.
The average score was TULSA 81.1, OPPONENT 81.4 - (Rating = 0*) | TULSA is 7-13 against the money line (-10.4 Units) after scoring 80 points or more over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 78.7, OPPONENT 79.0 - (Rating = 0*) | TULSA is 9-21 against the money line (-12.9 Units) after a combined score of 155 points or more over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 80.2, OPPONENT 81.8 - (Rating = 1*) | TULSA is 5-12 against the money line (-9.5 Units) after a combined score of 165 points or more over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 78.3, OPPONENT 79.4 - (Rating = 1*) | TULSA is 3-10 against the money line (-9.7 Units) after a combined score of 175 points or more over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 77.7, OPPONENT 79.0 - (Rating = 1*) |
|
|
WASHINGTON is 220-345 against the money line (-113.6 Units) in all games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.3, OPPONENT 73.7 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 105-257 against the money line (-73.4 Units) as an underdog since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 69.0, OPPONENT 75.7 - (Rating = 0*) | WASHINGTON is 65-109 against the money line (-52.9 Units) in July games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 69.9, OPPONENT 73.7 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 153-232 against the money line (-74.3 Units) in May, June, or July games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 71.0, OPPONENT 73.6 - (Rating = 0*) | WASHINGTON is 32-68 against the money line (-35.8 Units) on Saturday games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 68.9, OPPONENT 73.7 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 43-77 against the money line (-37.8 Units) when playing with 2 days rest since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.1, OPPONENT 74.6 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 2-9 against the money line (-8.4 Units) after a division game this season.
The average score was WASHINGTON 69.4, OPPONENT 76.4 - (Rating = 2*) | WASHINGTON is 83-142 against the money line (-63.2 Units) after 2 consecutive division games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 69.7, OPPONENT 73.5 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 52-96 against the money line (-48.8 Units) after 3 consecutive division games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 69.4, OPPONENT 73.5 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 92-155 against the money line (-64.3 Units) when playing 5 or less games in 14 days since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 71.1, OPPONENT 74.3 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 15-37 against the money line (-19.2 Units) when playing only their 2nd game in 5 days over the last 3 seasons.
The average score was WASHINGTON 71.9, OPPONENT 77.2 - (Rating = 0*) | WASHINGTON is 96-171 against the money line (-81.6 Units) after 1 or more consecutive unders since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 69.7, OPPONENT 73.6 - (Rating = 2*) | WASHINGTON is 83-127 against the money line (-47.2 Units) after having lost 2 of their last 3 games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.3, OPPONENT 74.0 - (Rating = 0*) | WASHINGTON is 41-100 against the money line (-58.3 Units) after failing to cover 3 of their last 4 against the spread since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 69.3, OPPONENT 74.7 - (Rating = 2*) | WASHINGTON is 6-21 against the money line (-14.8 Units) after having lost 3 of their last 4 games over the last 3 seasons.
The average score was WASHINGTON 71.7, OPPONENT 79.8 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 23-40 against the money line (-24.6 Units) off an upset win over a division rival as an underdog since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 71.2, OPPONENT 73.8 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 40-64 against the money line (-30.6 Units) off an upset win as an underdog since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.4, OPPONENT 72.8 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 124-226 against the money line (-89.0 Units) after playing a game as an underdog since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.1, OPPONENT 74.2 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 73-146 against the money line (-62.2 Units) after playing 2 consecutive games as an underdog since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 69.7, OPPONENT 74.5 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 103-166 against the money line (-64.8 Units) after playing a road game since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.8, OPPONENT 73.7 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 47-72 against the money line (-31.6 Units) after playing 2 consecutive road games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.8, OPPONENT 73.8 - (Rating = 0*) | WASHINGTON is 93-124 against the money line (-43.0 Units) after 1 or more consecutive wins since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.8, OPPONENT 72.6 - (Rating = 0*) | TULSA is 15-11 against the money line (+14.4 Units) after having lost 5 or 6 of their last 7 games over the last 3 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 80.2, OPPONENT 80.9 - (Rating = 1*) | TULSA is 11-7 against the money line (+15.0 Units) after having lost 6 or 7 of their last 8 games over the last 3 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 80.4, OPPONENT 80.0 - (Rating = 2*) |
|
| | |
|
|
| All Games | 8-12 | -4.6 | 9-11 | 7-13 | 72.6 | 35.5 | 42.0% | 43.3 | 74.4 | 36.1 | 41.1% | 42.4 | | Road Games | 4-5 | +1 | 5-4 | 4-5 | 74.1 | 37.9 | 43.9% | 41.1 | 75.3 | 38.4 | 40.9% | 43.4 | | Last 5 Games | 2-3 | -1.7 | 2-3 | 2-3 | 71.2 | 34.6 | 40.4% | 42.6 | 73.4 | 38.4 | 41.9% | 42.8 |
|
| |
|
|
| Team Stats (All Games) | 72.6 | 35.5 | 27-65 | 42.0% | 5-17 | 27.8% | 13-16 | 82.2% | 43 | 10 | 17 | 19 | 7 | 14 | 3 | | vs opponents surrendering | 77.2 | 38.1 | 29-66 | 43.9% | 5-14 | 33.2% | 15-19 | 77.8% | 41 | 9 | 17 | 19 | 8 | 14 | 4 | | Team Stats (Road Games) | 74.1 | 37.9 | 28-64 | 43.9% | 5-17 | 30.7% | 13-16 | 82.1% | 41 | 8 | 16 | 19 | 5 | 12 | 4 | | Stats Against (All Games) | 74.4 | 36.1 | 28-68 | 41.1% | 5-14 | 33.2% | 14-19 | 73.8% | 42 | 10 | 16 | 18 | 8 | 11 | 3 | | vs opponents averaging | 77.5 | 38.5 | 29-66 | 43.9% | 5-14 | 34.0% | 15-20 | 77.2% | 41 | 9 | 17 | 19 | 8 | 14 | 4 | | Stats Against (Road Games) | 75.3 | 38.4 | 29-70 | 40.9% | 5-14 | 33.1% | 14-18 | 74.8% | 43 | 11 | 17 | 17 | 7 | 10 | 3 |
|
|
| |
|
|
| All Games | 7-13 | -4.2 | 12-8 | 14-6 | 82.4 | 39.5 | 43.5% | 43.0 | 83.5 | 42.3 | 46.9% | 39.7 | | Home Games | 4-6 | -1.6 | 5-5 | 5-5 | 81.6 | 41.1 | 42.0% | 42.6 | 79.4 | 41.1 | 46.7% | 38.9 | | Last 5 Games | 1-4 | -3.2 | 1-4 | 3-2 | 81.4 | 39.2 | 42.8% | 41.0 | 84.0 | 43.8 | 47.9% | 41.8 |
|
| |
|
|
| Team Stats (All Games) | 82.4 | 39.5 | 30-69 | 43.5% | 6-18 | 32.1% | 16-21 | 77.1% | 43 | 12 | 16 | 21 | 7 | 12 | 3 | | vs opponents surrendering | 77.2 | 37.9 | 29-66 | 43.9% | 5-15 | 32.6% | 14-18 | 79.0% | 41 | 9 | 17 | 19 | 8 | 14 | 4 | | Team Stats (Home Games) | 81.6 | 41.1 | 29-69 | 42.0% | 5-18 | 29.1% | 18-22 | 82.8% | 43 | 12 | 16 | 21 | 6 | 11 | 2 | | Stats Against (All Games) | 83.5 | 42.3 | 30-64 | 46.9% | 4-11 | 37.1% | 19-23 | 80.5% | 40 | 9 | 17 | 20 | 7 | 13 | 5 | | vs opponents averaging | 78 | 38.5 | 29-65 | 44.7% | 5-13 | 35.2% | 15-19 | 79.1% | 40 | 9 | 17 | 18 | 8 | 13 | 4 | | Stats Against (Home Games) | 79.4 | 41.1 | 29-62 | 46.7% | 3-9 | 33.7% | 18-23 | 80.0% | 39 | 9 | 16 | 20 | 7 | 12 | 4 |
|
| | Average power rating of opponents played: WASHINGTON 70.4, TULSA 70.9 |
| | |
|
|
| 6/5/2014 | @ CONNECTICUT | 74-66 | W | -120 | 30-58 | 51.7% | 49 | 15 | 26-76 | 34.2% | 38 | 9 | | 6/6/2014 | INDIANA | 61-64 | L | -200 | 18-61 | 29.5% | 51 | 17 | 21-60 | 35.0% | 38 | 11 | | 6/8/2014 | @ NEW YORK | 64-81 | L | +170 | 19-57 | 33.3% | 33 | 13 | 30-62 | 48.4% | 45 | 13 | | 6/10/2014 | PHOENIX | 66-81 | L | +155 | 29-68 | 42.6% | 41 | 15 | 32-63 | 50.8% | 35 | 9 | | 6/13/2014 | CHICAGO | 79-68 | W | -300 | 33-70 | 47.1% | 45 | 14 | 26-68 | 38.2% | 44 | 13 | | 6/15/2014 | ATLANTA | 67-75 | L | +155 | 26-62 | 41.9% | 42 | 19 | 26-68 | 38.2% | 52 | 17 | | 6/18/2014 | @ ATLANTA | 73-83 | L | +250 | 31-72 | 43.1% | 38 | 14 | 31-69 | 44.9% | 45 | 10 | | 6/20/2014 | @ MINNESOTA | 65-75 | L | +280 | 23-64 | 35.9% | 39 | 9 | 32-69 | 46.4% | 44 | 10 | | 6/22/2014 | @ SEATTLE | 86-89 | L | +145 | 36-69 | 52.2% | 35 | 11 | 31-72 | 43.1% | 45 | 8 | | 6/24/2014 | @ SAN ANTONIO | 81-70 | W | +200 | 32-63 | 50.8% | 40 | 9 | 27-69 | 39.1% | 37 | 8 | | 6/27/2014 | CONNECTICUT | 69-63 | W | -155 | 27-68 | 39.7% | 48 | 13 | 26-65 | 40.0% | 36 | 14 | | 6/29/2014 | SAN ANTONIO | 65-73 | L | -140 | 24-63 | 38.1% | 43 | 12 | 26-65 | 40.0% | 42 | 7 | | 7/2/2014 | INDIANA | 77-80 | L | -175 | 27-63 | 42.9% | 37 | 14 | 31-59 | 52.5% | 38 | 17 | | 7/5/2014 | @ ATLANTA | 73-86 | L | +300 | 29-65 | 44.6% | 44 | 15 | 35-76 | 46.1% | 48 | 8 | | 7/9/2014 | @ CHICAGO | 72-65 | W | +145 | 23-63 | 36.5% | 41 | 12 | 21-67 | 31.3% | 50 | 15 | | 7/12/2014 | @ TULSA | | | | | | | | | | | | | 7/15/2014 | @ PHOENIX | | | | | | | | | | | | | 7/17/2014 | @ LOS ANGELES | | | | | | | | | | | | | 7/23/2014 | CONNECTICUT | | | | | | | | | | | | | 7/25/2014 | TULSA | | | | | | | | | | | | | 7/27/2014 | ATLANTA | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 6/6/2014 | PHOENIX | 94-78 | W | +180 | 35-68 | 51.5% | 42 | 14 | 24-55 | 43.6% | 33 | 15 | | 6/10/2014 | NEW YORK | 72-57 | W | -175 | 28-68 | 41.2% | 46 | 9 | 23-65 | 35.4% | 45 | 10 | | 6/13/2014 | LOS ANGELES | 69-67 | W | +155 | 26-73 | 35.6% | 42 | 6 | 26-60 | 43.3% | 47 | 13 | | 6/15/2014 | SEATTLE | 85-79 | W | -270 | 31-66 | 47.0% | 40 | 8 | 29-55 | 52.7% | 29 | 11 | | 6/19/2014 | @ LOS ANGELES | 77-87 | L | +210 | 30-69 | 43.5% | 45 | 14 | 34-66 | 51.5% | 44 | 14 | | 6/20/2014 | @ PHOENIX | 80-91 | L | +500 | 31-79 | 39.2% | 54 | 5 | 34-66 | 51.5% | 35 | 8 | | 6/22/2014 | @ CHICAGO | 105-99 | W | +120 | 37-74 | 50.0% | 43 | 17 | 39-77 | 50.6% | 42 | 14 | | 6/25/2014 | @ INDIANA | 107-102 | W | +170 | 39-78 | 50.0% | 46 | 14 | 34-74 | 45.9% | 45 | 12 | | 6/28/2014 | LOS ANGELES | 89-92 | L | -115 | 31-74 | 41.9% | 47 | 16 | 36-76 | 47.4% | 46 | 11 | | 6/29/2014 | PHOENIX | 77-80 | L | +170 | 24-77 | 31.2% | 50 | 12 | 25-51 | 49.0% | 33 | 13 | | 7/1/2014 | @ NEW YORK | 74-90 | L | +120 | 28-70 | 40.0% | 34 | 9 | 36-68 | 52.9% | 52 | 14 | | 7/3/2014 | @ CONNECTICUT | 96-83 | W | +155 | 35-73 | 47.9% | 52 | 12 | 31-71 | 43.7% | 38 | 12 | | 7/5/2014 | CONNECTICUT | 76-78 | L | -165 | 27-67 | 40.3% | 42 | 11 | 30-68 | 44.1% | 43 | 14 | | 7/8/2014 | INDIANA | 76-78 | L | -115 | 25-59 | 42.4% | 41 | 15 | 28-63 | 44.4% | 36 | 11 | | 7/10/2014 | MINNESOTA | 85-91 | L | +135 | 31-72 | 43.1% | 36 | 10 | 33-60 | 55.0% | 40 | 12 | | 7/12/2014 | WASHINGTON | | | | | | | | | | | | | 7/16/2014 | @ MINNESOTA | | | | | | | | | | | | | 7/17/2014 | SAN ANTONIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | 7/22/2014 | @ SAN ANTONIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | 7/25/2014 | @ WASHINGTON | | | | | | | | | | | | | 7/27/2014 | CHICAGO | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
| | |
| WASHINGTON is 24-26 (+4.5 Units) against the money line versus TULSA since 1997 |
| |
| WASHINGTON is 3-1 (+3.1 Units) against the money line versus TULSA over the last 3 seasons |
|
|
|
| |
| WASHINGTON is 9-15 (+1.0 Units) against the money line versus TULSA since 1997 |
| |
| WASHINGTON is 1-1 (+1.1 Units) against the money line versus TULSA over the last 3 seasons |
|
|
|
| |
|
6/30/2013 | TULSA | 61 | 159.5 | Under | 34 | 17-70 | 24.3% | 8-31 | 25.8% | 19-24 | 79.2% | 40 | 14 | 15 | | | WASHINGTON | 84 | -3.5 | SU ATS | 44 | 29-67 | 43.3% | 5-11 | 45.5% | 21-27 | 77.8% | 62 | 17 | 18 | 5/27/2013 | WASHINGTON | 95 | 157 | SU ATS | 47 | 31-67 | 46.3% | 7-16 | 43.7% | 26-38 | 68.4% | 50 | 7 | 14 | | | TULSA | 90 | -6.5 | Over | 46 | 32-74 | 43.2% | 8-16 | 50.0% | 18-22 | 81.8% | 44 | 9 | 15 |
|
| | |
|
Mike is 67-64 against the money line (+21.6 Units) in road games in May, June, or July games in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Mike 76.0, OPPONENT 75.8 - (Rating = 0*) | Mike is 39-17 against the money line (+15.9 Units) after scoring 40 points or more in the first half in 2 straight games in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Mike 78.6, OPPONENT 73.4 - (Rating = 0*) | Mike is 93-69 against the money line (+25.7 Units) after playing a game as an underdog in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Mike 76.8, OPPONENT 74.4 - (Rating = 1*) | Mike is 40-27 against the money line (+23.8 Units) after playing 2 consecutive games as an underdog in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Mike 77.0, OPPONENT 73.6 - (Rating = 2*) | Mike is 26-17 against the money line (+13.1 Units) after playing 2 consecutive games as a road underdog in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Mike 76.7, OPPONENT 73.4 - (Rating = 0*) | Mike is 56-35 against the money line (+17.5 Units) in road games when playing against a team with a losing record in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Mike 77.5, OPPONENT 73.7 - (Rating = 0*) | Fred is 10-18 against the money line (-15.4 Units) off a loss against a division rival in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 78.5, OPPONENT 80.4 - (Rating = 1*) | Fred is 3-11 against the money line (-12.0 Units) off a home loss in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 79.1, OPPONENT 82.1 - (Rating = 2*) | Fred is 1-6 against the money line (-8.0 Units) in home games after allowing 75 points or more in 4 straight games in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 78.1, OPPONENT 78.1 - (Rating = 0*) | Fred is 4-16 against the money line (-14.9 Units) after a loss by 6 points or less in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 79.6, OPPONENT 85.1 - (Rating = 3*) | Fred is 12-21 against the money line (-16.1 Units) after scoring 70 points or more in 4 straight games in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 79.2, OPPONENT 79.7 - (Rating = 1*) | Fred is 0-6 against the money line (-9.0 Units) in home games after a combined score of 150 points or more in 4 straight games in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 76.5, OPPONENT 81.7 - (Rating = 0*) | Fred is 17-30 against the money line (-25.6 Units) after 1 or more consecutive losses in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 77.4, OPPONENT 79.2 - (Rating = 2*) | Fred is 15-24 against the money line (-21.9 Units) versus up-tempo teams averaging 62 or more shots/game after 15+ games in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 75.8, OPPONENT 77.6 - (Rating = 2*) | Fred is 2-14 against the money line (-13.7 Units) vs. excellent free throw shooting teams - making >=80% of their shots in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 74.1, OPPONENT 81.4 - (Rating = 3*) | Fred is 8-18 against the money line (-22.2 Units) versus poor pressure defensive teams - forcing <=14 turnovers/game after 15+ games in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 73.9, OPPONENT 76.7 - (Rating = 3*) | Fred is 15-23 against the money line (-19.9 Units) versus poor pressure defensive teams - forcing <=14 turnovers/game in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 75.9, OPPONENT 77.2 - (Rating = 1*) | Fred is 8-17 against the money line (-19.5 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 Fred 74.9, OPPONENT 76.8 - (Rating = 3*) | Fred is 12-18 against the money line (-16.3 Units) versus teams who average 42 or more rebounds/game on the season in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 76.7, OPPONENT 78.0 - (Rating = 1*) | Fred is 12-20 against the money line (-24.7 Units) versus terrible defensive teams - allowing 73+ points/game after 15+ games in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 76.9, OPPONENT 77.0 - (Rating = 3*) | Fred is 21-29 against the money line (-25.6 Units) versus terrible defensive teams - allowing 73+ points/game in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 78.4, OPPONENT 78.2 - (Rating = 1*) |
|
|
Mike is 17-22 against the money line (-17.3 Units) versus teams who average 7 or less steals/game on the season after 15+ games in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Mike 69.8, OPPONENT 71.5 - (Rating = 0*) | Mike is 35-38 against the money line (-26.5 Units) versus teams who average 7 or less steals/game on the season in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Mike 72.6, OPPONENT 73.5 - (Rating = 0*) | Fred is 17-4 against the money line (+12.7 Units) in home games after playing a home game in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 82.6, OPPONENT 74.0 - (Rating = 2*) |
|
| | |
|
| Since 1997, the home favorite won the game straight up 184 times, while the road underdog won straight up 116 times. No Edge. | | Over the last 3 seasons, the home favorite won the game straight up 13 times, while the road underdog won straight up 8 times. No Edge. |
|
| | |
| [F] 07/11/2014 - Jelena Milovanovic doubtful Saturday vs. Tulsa Shock ( Knee ) | |
| No significant injuries. |
|
|
| | Last Updated: 5/3/2024 10:53:45 PM EST. |
|
|
| |
|