From the article:
"At -190 to win the award, Stroud has an implied probability of 65.5% to take home Offensive Rookie of the Year. Nacua is +300 to win it, giving him an implied probability of only 25%."The odds, as is always the case, reflect what the bettors think. Not what Vegas thinks. Not what some editor-in-chief thinks. The bettors.
When Vegas post odds, whether it be a point spread, an over-under, or odds to win Offensive Rookie of the Year (ORY) all they take into account is how they expect bettors to bet. If they make a team a 7 point favorite they are not saying that Team A should beat Team B by 7 points. The are saying "We think that if we make the point spread 7 points that there will be as much money placed on Team A as in Team B". And why is that? It's because Vegas will make *exactly* the same amount of money no matter which team wins if that happens.
And when the money doesn't fall evenly? Vegas will adjust the odds to make the money fall evenly. That's why odds rise or fall during the week. If Team A is drawing too much money the spread goes up; if Team B is drawing too much money the spread goes down.
Back to ORY. Lots of people heard of CJ Stroud before the season even began and there was undoubtedly a ton of money bet on him before he even took a snap. Puka? Not so much. So naturally Puka will have longer odds than Stroud.
Just to analyze these odds:If you bet $100 on Puka and he wins ORY you pocket $300. But in order to win $300 on Stroud you have to bet $570. So all the odds are saying is that there's nearly 6 times as much money riding on Stroud as there is on Puka.
What the odds don't say is that Stroud is having a better rookie season than Puka.
As for Vegas, they should make the same amount no matter who wins the award.
AlbaNY_Ram
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/25/2023 08:07AM by AlbaNY_Ram.
