DIME
WNBA 2025–26: 134–82 ATS · +37.4u
Get the picks

← form_wnba · WNBA

2026-07-15

Day by day

these are the form_wnba picks — the book grading is currently serving, and the same set listed in the sheet below. The season figure in the header bar is that same book over the whole season; this is a recent window of it.

17–20 · 46% · −6.84u across the last 1 days

07/1517–2046%−6.84u3 games

permalink to 2026-07-15 →

SEA @ CHI3–8−5.84u
  • Natasha Cloud Under 10.5 PTS13 vs 10.5shots didn't fall — the read held upCloud exceeded the 10.5 line despite Seattle's elite perimeter defense (3rd in PPG allowed to guards) by executing at an elite 85% true shooting, including 2-for-3 from three and 5-for-6 from free throw, while playing a full 30 minutes at 16% usage. The combination of efficient shot-making and free-throw volume proved too much for the matchup-based under thesis.
  • Natisha Hiedeman Over 16.5 PTS6 vs 16.5shots didn't fall — the read held upHiedeman's shot selection and efficiency collapsed despite 30 minutes of run: she went 3-11 from the field (27% TS) and bricked all five 3-point attempts, falling well short of the 16.5-point line on just 18% usage.
  • Sydney Taylor Over 1.5 3PM1 vs 1.5no clean explanationTaylor went 1-for-6 from three despite solid overall efficiency (7-15 FG), as cold perimeter shooting derailed what looked like a favorable matchup; the extra 3 minutes of run didn't offset the 33% three-point rate that fell well short of her recent 2.8 per-game average.
  • Azura Stevens Under 13.5 PTS20 vs 13.5shots didn't fall — the read held upStevens torched the under on 8-16 shooting (50% FG, 59% TS%) with extended run at 33 minutes, delivering 20 points on efficient volume that far exceeded the 13.5-point threshold despite moderate 25% usage. The over price of +106 punished bettors who followed the pre-game lean on what proved to be a hot-shooting, high-minute performance.
  • Natisha Hiedeman Over 15.5 PTS6 vs 15.5paid over the fair numberHiedeman's 27% TS and 3-11 shooting (27% FG) represented a catastrophic collapse from her L10/L5 averages of 18.5–18.8 PPG, despite logging 30 minutes and maintaining her typical 18% usage rate. The offensive efficiency breakdown—compounded by 0-5 from three—overwhelmed volume to render the over unplayable.
  • Natasha Cloud Under 5.5 AST6 vs 5.5 — missed by a hairpaid over the fair numberCloud exceeded the under threshold by a single assist despite modest 16% usage, generating 6 dimes in 30 minutes with efficient scoring (85% TS%) that kept her engaged in the offense—the sharp +130 value proved vulnerable to even slight playmaking variance in a close final tally.
GSV @ IND6–8−3.05u
  • Aliyah Boston Over 15.5 PTS15 vs 15.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upBoston fell just short despite solid efficiency (63% TS, 6-11 FG), but 25 minutes—nearly 5 below her recent average—combined with 26% usage limited her to exactly 15 points, one shy of the line. The under-time and reduced offensive role in a close game (+1 +/-) prevented her from reaching the scoring volume needed to cash the over.
  • Kayla Thornton Under 8.5 PTS11 vs 8.5shots didn't fall — the read held upThornton exceeded the under despite modest 3-8 shooting (37.5% FG) by staying on the court for 31 minutes and converting all three free throws, combining for 11 points on 59% true shooting—outpacing her L10 average of 6.2 by nearly 5 points. The blowout win (+21 +/-) likely kept her in longer than typical, and her perfect 3-3 FT performance compensated for below-average field goal volume.
  • Monique Billings Over 6.5 PTS4 vs 6.5paid over the fair numberBillings shot just 1-5 from the field and converted only 2 of 4 free throws, finishing at 30% TS—well below her season norm—despite playing 26 minutes and maintaining healthy usage at 12%. The poor shooting efficiency, not reduced opportunity, sank the over.
  • Monique Billings Over 5.5 PTS4 vs 5.5no clean explanationBillings shot just 1-5 from the field (20%) and 2-4 from free throw, combining for a 30% true shooting rate that made up the entire scoring shortfall; despite playing 26 minutes with reasonable opportunity, inefficient shot selection and poor finishing prevented her from reaching 6 points.
  • Kelsey Mitchell Over 21.5 PTS20 vs 21.5 — missed by a hairno clean explanationMitchell fell just short despite 35 minutes of work, as Las Vegas's elite perimeter defense (allowing 31.3 PPG to guards, league's best) held her to 7-16 shooting (43.8%)—a significant dip from her 27.6 PPG average over her previous five games. The one-point miss came down to shot-making: she needed just 22 points to cash but couldn't overcome the cold shooting night against the WNBA's top-ranked defense.
  • Kelsey Mitchell Over 20.5 PTS20 vs 20.5 — missed by a hairno clean explanationMitchell shot 7-16 from the field and missed critical attempts down the stretch in a tight game, falling one point short despite her heavy usage and efficient free-throw shooting. The recent 25.9 PPG average didn't materialize due to below-season-average efficiency (58% TS vs her typical output), costing her the half-point push needed to clear 20.5.
LAS @ MIN8–4+2.05u
  • Courtney Williams Under 15.5 PTS19 vs 15.5no clean explanationWilliams shot 7-13 (54%) from the field and got to the line 5 times despite the expected blowout script, converting 4 free throws to reach 19 points and exceed the 15.5 line. The game stayed closer than the -12 spread suggested (she finished -3), keeping her in the game's flow longer than pre-game models anticipated.
  • Courtney Williams Over 4.5 REB2 vs 4.5no clean explanationWilliams played 35 minutes with solid efficiency (62% TS) but crashed the boards far below expectation, nabbing just 2 rebounds—well short of the 4.5 line—despite 23% usage suggesting adequate opportunity and only 1 foul that wouldn't have limited her availability.
  • Olivia Miles Over 18.5 PTS18 vs 18.5 — missed by a hairno clean explanationMiles fell one point short despite solid efficiency (57% TS, 7-14 FG), limited by just 26 minutes of playing time in what turned into a closer contest than anticipated, preventing her from reaching the volume needed to clear 18.5.
  • Courtney Williams Under 16.5 PTS19 vs 16.5no clean explanationWilliams exceeded the 16.5 line by converting 7-of-13 shots (53.8% FG) with efficient free-throw shooting (4-5), offsetting her cold 3-point night to reach 19 points on 62% true shooting despite modest 23% usage. The bet missed because she played high-volume interior offense in a competitive game (35 minutes, -3 +/-) rather than defaulting to her recent 13.5 ppg pace.

Flat 1 unit per priced bet, settled at the price we posted. Voids are not bets — excluded from the record, the hit rate and the units. Open a day for the per-game split and why each loss lost.