It's an interesting question, and I will say that BB hit on most of the likely key points.
There may well be a negative psychological effect on the visitors playing in such an unusual park.
Another factor I would mention is that Boston has been a top team for a while now, and being a top team might magnify the advantage you get in baseball from playing at home. I wonder if/when the Red Sox turn into a bad team, if their unusual advantage when playing at home will hold. As opposed to, for instance, teams from Denver, where because of the altitude, they tend to have a stronger than normal edge at home, even when they are only average or below-average teams.
But as far as Boston at home, for the past few years, and right now, is concerned, I would definitely say that they have an unusual edge at home, but that that edge, in general, is an edge you pay a premium for in the lines.
Still, I do think Boston's strong play at home can be used to find value in their home games at times. They tend to be a huge favorite game after game at home of course, but because of that, I don't think the market differentiates perfectly when they are likely to have a huge home edge, and when they are likely to have a lesser home edge.
A very good example of this was actually yesterday's game with KC when Bannister was starting. Since Bannister has been very effective at times (and also has that enormous day/night disparity) and also since KC has been respectable in general this year, the huge dog line for them might have seemed like a good bet. But to me, it looked like the classic Boston home game with a huge line where the appearance of value with the road dog was a mirage. I'm not saying I was necessarily right, KC did make that good comeback in the late innings and only lost by 3, and I didn't bet Boston at around -200, but that's my take on it, and in no way did I consider betting on KC. In general, my sense is that Boston is in a particularly good position to win at home when those high-scoring shootouts happen.
|