DIME
WNBANBAEuroLeagueEuro

← all formulas · WNBA

role_gated_board

264–227 over 491 priced bets · -24.0u · ROI -4.9% -12.8% to +3.0% · CLV +1.35¢ +1.1% to +1.6%

Not yet separable from break-even — the ROI interval spans zero, so this record is consistent with a real edge AND with none.

THE PICKS · priced bets only, newest first

Every day, every game, every miss.

Day by day

Latest 25 graded days from the same CORE benchmark shown in the headline, charts and sheet: role_gated_board.

264–227 · 54% · −24.01u across the last 25 days

10/264–357%−0.01u1 game

permalink to 2026-10-26 →

ATL @ GSV4–3−0.01u
  • Gabby Williams Under 4.5 REB6 vs 4.5shots didn't fall — the read held up
  • Angel Reese Under 11.5 REB15 vs 11.5paid over the fair number
  • Angel Reese Under 12.5 REB15 vs 12.5no clean explanation
10/244–357%+0.13u1 game

permalink to 2026-10-24 →

GSV @ ATL4–3+0.13u
  • Jordin Canada Over 6.5 AST4 vs 6.5shots didn't fall — the read held up
  • Jordin Canada Over 11.5 PTS10 vs 11.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held up
  • Jordin Canada Over 10.5 PTS10 vs 10.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held up
10/197–1041%−3.79u1 game

permalink to 2026-10-19 →

ATL @ GSV7–10−3.79u
  • Kayla Thornton Over 2.5 REB2 vs 2.5shots didn't fall — the read held upThornton fell one rebound short despite solid playing time (19 min), held back by minimal offensive involvement (7% usage, 1-3 FG) that limited her opportunities to crash the glass and generate second-chance boards.
  • Kayla Thornton Over 3.5 PTS2 vs 3.5no clean explanationThornton shot just 1-for-3 from the field despite logging 19 minutes, a significant underperformance that kept her well short of the 3.5-point line; her 7% usage rate and 33% true shooting indicate limited offensive involvement and poor efficiency when she did touch the ball.
  • Kayla Thornton Over 4.5 PTS2 vs 4.5shots didn't fall — the read held upThornton's 7% usage rate and 1-3 shooting (33% TS) left her well short of the 4.5-point line despite adequate 19-minute run; she simply didn't get enough volume or hit enough of her limited attempts to clear the threshold.
  • Gabby Williams Over 2.5 AST1 vs 2.5shots didn't fall — the read held upWilliams took a ball-dominant role (36% usage) but struggled to generate offense, posting a 39% true shooting and turning it over 3 times in 27 minutes, which limited her playmaking opportunities and resulted in just 1 assist.
  • Angel Reese Under 10.5 REB16 vs 10.5shots didn't fall — the read held upReese dominated the glass with 16 rebounds on 34 minutes and elite 72% true shooting, translating her high-volume touches (30% usage) into both scoring and rebounding opportunities that far exceeded the 10.5 line. Her 5 fouls without fouling out meant she stayed on the floor for a full game script, capturing 6 offensive rebounds that typically swing the over/under on this type of bet.
  • Rhyne Howard Over 2.5 AST2 vs 2.5no clean explanationHoward fell one assist short despite playing 28 minutes, hampered by poor offensive efficiency (2-7 FG, 13% usage) that limited her opportunity to generate playmaking chances. Her game centered on perimeter defense (6 steals) rather than ball-handling, resulting in just 2 dimes on the night.
10/175–1033%−6.37u1 game

permalink to 2026-10-17 →

ATL @ GSV5–10−6.37u
  • Naz Hillmon Over 1.5 AST0 vs 1.5paid over the fair numberHillmon's playmaking evaporated despite 30 minutes on court—she recorded zero assists while turning the ball over once, suggesting she operated primarily as a scorer rather than a facilitator in this game's flow.
  • Jordin Canada Over 11.5 PTS8 vs 11.5shots didn't fall — the read held upCanada played 38 minutes but shot just 3-9 from the field (33%) with a 40% true shooting percentage, falling well short of the scoring volume needed to clear 11.5 despite her high usage rate of 16%.
  • Gabby Williams Over 2.5 AST2 vs 2.5shots didn't fall — the read held upWilliams fell one assist short despite heavy offensive usage (35%), as she prioritized scoring (26 pts on 22 attempts) over playmaking in a game where the team got out to an early lead (+16 final margin).
  • Angel Reese Under 10.5 REB12 vs 10.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upReese grabbed 12 rebounds in 35 minutes of heavy involvement, staying out of foul trouble (5 PF) and dominating the glass despite modest offensive efficiency. The under missed because she logged enough volume and minutes to consistently crash the boards, landing just over the 10.5 threshold.
  • Angel Reese Over 14.5 PTS14 vs 14.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upReese fell one point short despite 35 minutes and solid 5-11 shooting (45% FG), as four fouls limited her aggression and she converted only 4-of-7 free throws, costing her the scoring cushion needed to clear 14.5.
  • Angel Reese Under 11.5 REB12 vs 11.5 — missed by a hairno clean explanationReese grabbed one more board than needed to bust the under, finishing with 12 rebounds across 35 minutes of heavy involvement despite modest 24% usage, as she crashed the glass consistently in a close contest (+2 rating). The under missed by just one rebound on a night where she didn't need elite scoring efficiency to accumulate boards.
10/099–1341%−6.87u2 games

permalink to 2026-10-09 →

ATL @ NYL5–9−5.64u
  • Pauline Astier Over 1.5 REB0 vs 1.5game script — blowout or foul troubleAstier played only 8 minutes with minimal involvement (12% usage), leaving her no opportunity to accumulate the 2 rebounds needed to clear the over. Her limited court time and complete absence from the glass made the 1.5 rebound line unsustainable.
  • Leonie Fiebich Over 3.5 REB2 vs 3.5shots didn't fall — the read held upFiebich played heavy minutes (37) but generated minimal rebounding activity, finishing with just 2 boards despite 12% usage—a reflection of her perimeter-heavy role and limited interior presence in a game where she struggled shooting (2-7 FG). The combination of low usage and her positioning kept her off the glass despite the extended run.
  • Rhyne Howard Under 20.5 PTS21 vs 20.5 — missed by a hairno clean explanationHoward's efficient 7-21 shooting night (33% FG, 40% 3PT) combined with 38 minutes of heavy usage (30%) to push her just over the line at 21 points, as Atlanta leaned on her scoring in a close contest.
  • Jonquel Jones Under 2.5 AST3 vs 2.5no clean explanationJones stayed on court for all 38 minutes and seized playmaking opportunities in a high-usage game (26%), finishing one assist above the line despite modest assist volume. Her dominance in scoring (26 pts on elite 71% TS) and rebounding (14) kept her involved in the offense enough to reach 3 dimes.
  • Pauline Astier Over 2.5 REB0 vs 2.5game script — blowout or foul troubleAstier logged just 8 minutes with 12% usage, providing minimal opportunity to accumulate boards, and failed to secure a single rebound in that limited run.
  • Pauline Astier Over 4.5 PTS0 vs 4.5game script — blowout or foul troubleAstier saw just 8 minutes of action with minimal usage (12%), going 0-1 from the field to finish scoreless—a far cry from the 5+ points needed to cash the over. Limited playing time and a quick hook made scoring opportunities non-existent.
GSV @ LVA4–4−1.23u
  • Jackie Young Over 6.5 AST2 vs 6.5shots didn't fall — the read held upYoung's playmaking dried up despite heavy usage and 42 minutes on the floor, tallying just 2 assists while turning the ball over 5 times—a combination of ball-handling issues and the team's offensive struggles (evident in her -10 rating) that prevented her from facilitating at the expected rate.
  • Jackie Young Over 5.5 AST2 vs 5.5shots didn't fall — the read held upYoung played 42 minutes with heavy usage (27%) but generated just 2 assists while turning the ball over 5 times, suggesting she was attacking downhill rather than facilitating, and picked up 5 fouls that limited her ability to dictate tempo. A blowout loss (-10 +/-) in which she shot inefficiently (6-16 FG) likely forced Las Vegas into isolation-heavy, low-rhythm offense rather than the ball-movement sets needed to accumulate assists.
  • Kiah Stokes Under 3.5 PTS11 vs 3.5no clean explanationStokes erupted from three-point range (5-5 FG, 1-1 3PT) while playing a season-high 38 minutes in a blowout (+18), far exceeding her typical usage to rack up 11 points and shred the under.
  • Stephanie Talbot Over 5.5 PTS0 vs 5.5shots didn't fall — the read held upTalbot was a complete no-show offensively despite 21 minutes of run, going 0-for-2 from the field with a 5% usage rate—she simply didn't get enough touches or couldn't convert when she did, failing to reach even one made basket.
10/0714–574%+5.27u2 games

permalink to 2026-10-07 →

LVA @ GSV4–2+0.94u
  • A'ja Wilson Over 25.5 PTS24 vs 25.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upWilson fell just short despite efficient shooting (9-16 FG, 6-6 FT) because she generated only 24 points in 36 minutes with 29% usage—she needed one more scoring possession to clear 25.5. The tight margin suggests near-elite efficiency couldn't overcome modest shot volume on the night.
  • A'ja Wilson Over 24.5 PTS24 vs 24.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upWilson fell one point short despite efficient shooting (9-16 FG, 6-6 FT) because she didn't get enough volume—29% usage and 36 minutes limited her shot diet just enough to miss the over by a single point.
NYL @ ATL10–3+4.33u
  • Pauline Astier Over 2.5 REB1 vs 2.5shots didn't fall — the read held upAstier managed only 1 rebound in 14 minutes despite taking 6 shots, as her limited floor time and lack of offensive rebounding opportunities kept her well short of the 2.5 mark. Her 25% usage rate and early foul trouble (1 PF in sparse minutes) restricted her ability to crash the glass consistently.
  • DeWanna Bonner Under 2.5 AST3 vs 2.5shots didn't fall — the read held upBonner hit the over by one assist despite shooting poorly (2-11 FG), as her 34 minutes of floor time and ball-handling role kept her in position to record multiple dimes even when her scoring touch abandoned her.
  • Pauline Astier Over 3.5 REB1 vs 3.5shots didn't fall — the read held upAstier played just 14 minutes and grabbed only 1 rebound, far short of the 3.5 over; limited run and a modest usage rate (25%) kept her off the glass and unable to accumulate boards.
10/0410–953%−1.47u2 games

permalink to 2026-10-04 →

NYL @ ATL5–5−1.14u
  • Sabrina Ionescu Under 15.5 PTS27 vs 15.5shots didn't fall — the read held upIonescu torched the under, shooting 10-20 from the field (50%) and 3-8 from three while logging 34 minutes and commanding 35% usage—well above what's needed to clear 15.5 points. Her elite 62% true shooting efficiency and high volume made the under untenable.
  • Jonquel Jones Under 2.5 AST4 vs 2.5shots didn't fall — the read held upJones exceeded the 2.5 assists line by dishing 4 assists while playing a full 32 minutes with elevated usage (17%), as the Liberty leaned on her playmaking from the post more than typical. The under missed despite modest offensive efficiency because she operated as a secondary facilitator alongside heavier volume touches in what appeared to be an offensive system adjustment.
  • Sabrina Ionescu Under 14.5 PTS27 vs 14.5no clean explanationIonescu torched the line on 10-20 shooting (50% FG) and 4-4 from the free-throw line, nearly doubling the under projection with her 62% true shooting and elite 35% usage rate over 34 minutes.
  • Naz Hillmon Over 6.5 PTS0 vs 6.5shots didn't fall — the read held upHillmon played heavy minutes (37) but was nearly invisible offensively, going 0-2 from the field with minimal shot attempts (6% usage), rendering her rebounding and assist contributions unable to compensate for a complete scoring drought.
  • Sabrina Ionescu Under 16.5 PTS27 vs 16.5no clean explanationIonescu caught fire from the field, shooting 10-20 (50% FG) with efficient 62% true shooting to blow past the 16.5-point line, staying on the floor for 34 minutes with 35% usage despite a blowout loss.
LVA @ GSV5–4−0.33u
  • Gabby Williams Under 4.5 REB11 vs 4.5no clean explanationWilliams dominated the glass with 11 rebounds across 34 minutes, more than doubling the 4.5 line, as her 31% usage rate and clean foul trouble (0 PF) allowed her to stay on the court and crash consistently on both ends.
  • Jackie Young Over 17.5 PTS11 vs 17.5no clean explanationYoung's 4-15 shooting (26.7% FG) and 37% true shooting marked a sharp offensive collapse despite logging 38 minutes and maintaining high usage (24%), leaving her well short of the 17.5-point line.
  • Jackie Young Over 5.5 AST5 vs 5.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upYoung fell one assist short despite 38 minutes of heavy usage, held back by poor shot efficiency (4-15 FG) that forced her into a more scoring-dependent role rather than facilitating opportunities for teammates.
  • A'ja Wilson Over 24.5 PTS24 vs 24.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upWilson fell one point short despite 35 minutes and heavy 39% usage, hampered by inefficient 8-21 shooting (38% FG) that couldn't overcome her 8-11 free-throw production.
10/024–640%−3.00u1 game

permalink to 2026-10-02 →

DAL @ GSV4–6−3.00u
  • Paige Bueckers Over 3.5 REB1 vs 3.5shots didn't fall — the read held upBueckers played a full 38 minutes but crashed the glass just once despite high usage (26%), as she functioned primarily as a perimeter scorer and facilitator (10 FT attempts, 6 assists) rather than a rebounder in this matchup.
  • Awak Kuier Over 6.5 PTS6 vs 6.5 — missed by a hairpaid over the fair numberKuier fell one point short despite efficient 75% true shooting and 33 minutes of floor time, undone by minimal usage (8%) that limited her scoring opportunities despite converting 3 of 4 from the field.
  • Arike Ogunbowale Over 3.5 AST2 vs 3.5shots didn't fall — the read held upOgunbowale's shot-heavy usage (44%) and high volume (21 FG attempts) left little room for playmaking, and she turned the ball over 5 times while recording just 2 assists—well short of the 3.5 line despite her 30-point performance.
  • Paige Bueckers Over 17.5 PTS17 vs 17.5 — missed by a hairno clean explanationBueckers fell one point short despite 38 minutes and 26% usage, held back by poor shot selection: she connected on just 3 of 14 field goals (21%), with her 10-for-10 free-throw performance unable to compensate for the ice-cold shooting from the floor.
  • Arike Ogunbowale Over 2.5 AST2 vs 2.5no clean explanationArike's scoring-heavy usage (44%) and 5 turnovers limited playmaking opportunities, resulting in just 2 assists despite 34 minutes and 30 points. She also picked up 5 fouls, which may have forced more isolation scoring rather than ball movement in crunch situations.
  • Awak Kuier Over 4.5 REB4 vs 4.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upKuier fell one rebound short despite playing 33 minutes, held back by low usage (8%) that limited her opportunities to crash the glass in a game where she was a complementary scorer rather than a focal point of the offense.
10/012–529%−3.71u1 game

permalink to 2026-10-01 →

IND @ LVA2–5−3.71u
  • Chelsea Gray Under 13.5 PTS23 vs 13.5shots didn't fall — the read held upGray exploded well beyond expectation on 8-15 shooting (53% FG) and a perfect 6-6 from the line, nearly doubling the 13.5 total despite modest 25% usage, powered by elite 65% true shooting efficiency.
  • A'ja Wilson Over 2.5 AST1 vs 2.5shots didn't fall — the read held upWilson's offensive burden was so heavy—31% usage with 36 points on 37 minutes—that she operated almost exclusively as a scorer rather than a facilitator, resulting in just 1 assist despite elite efficiency. The Las Vegas attack ran through her scoring rather than playmaking, making the over on assists a victim of her dominant but ball-dominant performance.
  • Aliyah Boston Under 17.5 PTS19 vs 17.5 — missed by a hairno clean explanationBoston's efficient 8-16 shooting (50% FG) combined with 32 minutes of run allowed her to reach 19 points despite a modest 22% usage rate, as her high shooting volume on limited touches overcame the under's expectation of a lower-scoring night.
  • Aliyah Boston Under 7.5 REB10 vs 7.5shots didn't fall — the read held upBoston dominated the glass with 10 rebounds in 32 minutes, converting 50% of her shot attempts and drawing four fouls that kept her on the court despite foul trouble, easily clearing the 7.5 line.
  • Aliyah Boston Under 8.5 REB10 vs 8.5shots didn't fall — the read held upBoston grabbed 10 rebounds in 32 minutes with 4 personal fouls, staying active on the glass despite foul trouble and hitting the board for 1.5 more than the 8.5 line required. Her 22% usage rate kept her in the game long enough to accumulate boards without getting benched, allowing the rebounding total to creep over.
09/3011–2134%−12.77u2 games

permalink to 2026-09-30 →

GSV @ DAL3–13−10.88u
  • Jessica Shepard Over 9.5 PTS4 vs 9.5no clean explanationShepard played heavy minutes (41) but was nearly invisible on offense, shooting just 2-5 from the field and generating only 9% usage—well below her typical volume—to finish with just 4 points despite the extended run.
  • Kayla Thornton Under 5.5 REB6 vs 5.5 — missed by a hairno clean explanationThornton grabbed one more rebound than the line allowed, reaching 6 boards in 31 minutes despite modest 15% usage; she stayed out of foul trouble (2 PF) and remained on the floor for the full game to accumulate the extra glass.
  • Tiffany Hayes Under 2.5 REB3 vs 2.5no clean explanationHayes grabbed exactly one rebound more than the projected ceiling, finishing with 3 boards in 15 minutes of limited action. The under missed by the narrowest margin despite her modest 24% usage rate, as she simply out-rebounded expectations in her restricted role.
  • Paige Bueckers Over 19.5 PTS10 vs 19.5shots didn't fall — the read held upBueckers' 10 points came on just 3-13 shooting (23% FG) despite playing all 43 minutes, as poor efficiency and low usage (18%) left her well short of the 19.5-point line. A 34% true shooting percentage—her lowest of the season—combined with limited volume kept her output at less than half her scoring threshold.
  • Cecilia Zandalasini Over 1.5 REB1 vs 1.5shots didn't fall — the read held upZandalasini came up one rebound short despite efficient scoring (2-3 FG), held back by limited rebounding opportunities in just 19 minutes of play. Her 10% usage rate and relatively modest court time restricted her ability to crash the boards enough to hit the over.
  • Gabby Williams Under 17.5 PTS36 vs 17.5paid over the fair numberWilliams torched the line with elite efficiency, shooting 12-23 from the field (52%) and a perfect 7-7 from the stripe while playing 37 minutes with 36% usage—nearly double the volume implied by a 17.5-point prop. Her 69% true shooting percentage and balanced scoring attack (5 threes, 7 assists) made the under an easy miss.
ATL @ WAS8–8−1.89u
  • Georgia Amoore Over 7.5 PTS2 vs 7.5shots didn't fall — the read held upAmoore's catastrophic 1-5 shooting (20% TS) and 0-4 from three—combined with just 11% usage despite 28 minutes—left her well short of 7.5 points; she scored only 2 and couldn't generate offensive opportunities even with extended floor time.
  • Jordin Canada Under 3.5 REB7 vs 3.5paid over the fair numberCanada nearly doubled the projection with 7 rebounds in 35 minutes, significantly outpacing her season averages likely due to extended floor time and elevated usage in a blowout win (+23) where she played heavy minutes without foul trouble (4 PF).
  • Kiki Iriafen Under 1.5 AST4 vs 1.5shots didn't fall — the read held upIriafen's 4 assists more than doubled the 1.5 line, driven by 36 minutes of heavy court time and a team-high 16 rebounds that created natural playmaking opportunities from the post and in transition.
  • Allisha Gray Under 19.5 PTS22 vs 19.5 — missed by a hairno clean explanationGray's efficient 44% overall shooting (8-18 FG) and perfect 3-for-3 free-throw night pushed her past the 19.5 line despite modest 27% usage, as she capitalized on her 35 minutes of court time with 57% true shooting.
  • Georgia Amoore Over 8.5 PTS2 vs 8.5shots didn't fall — the read held upAmoore shot just 1-for-5 from the field with an 0-for-4 night from three, finishing at 20% TS despite playing 28 minutes—a complete offensive breakdown that left her five points shy of the over even with heavy volume on the court.
  • Georgia Amoore Over 6.5 PTS2 vs 6.5no clean explanationAmoore shot 1-5 from the field and 0-4 from three despite 28 minutes of run, finishing with just 2 points on 20% true shooting—a historically cold performance that fell well short of the 6.5-point line. Her 11% usage rate and inability to convert any perimeter attempts left her 4.5 points short.
09/2921–1068%+5.37u2 games

permalink to 2026-09-29 →

MIN @ NYL12–8+1.24u
  • Leonie Fiebich Over 3.5 REB3 vs 3.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upFiebich fell one rebound short despite playing 29 minutes, held back by a low usage rate (9%) that limited her opportunities to crash the glass and compete for boards.
  • Courtney Williams Under 4.5 REB8 vs 4.5paid over the fair numberWilliams nearly doubled the projected total, grabbing 8 rebounds across 38 minutes of heavy involvement while posting a 24% usage rate that kept her in rebounding position throughout the game. The under missed decisively due to her elevated floor time and offensive workload creating consistent opportunities on the glass despite modest scoring efficiency.
  • Courtney Williams Under 12.5 PTS18 vs 12.5shots didn't fall — the read held upWilliams exceeded the under by shooting 8-of-17 from the field (47%) and playing all 38 minutes, generating 24% usage in a game where she stayed out of foul trouble with just 3 PF. Her efficient scoring night on high volume and heavy minutes availability was the key driver in surpassing 12.5 points.
  • Sabrina Ionescu Under 15.5 PTS18 vs 15.5shots didn't fall — the read held upIonescu exceeded the under on efficient shooting, going 7-15 from the field (47%) with 4 made threes despite modest usage, and played all 33 available minutes without foul trouble to compile her 18 points. Her 60% true shooting and elevated three-point volume (10 attempts) proved enough to clear 15.5 in a blowout where New York's +15 margin allowed her to stay on the floor.
  • Sabrina Ionescu Under 16.5 PTS18 vs 16.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upIonescu exceeded the under on efficient shooting, going 7-15 from the field (46.7%) with 4 three-pointers on high volume (33 minutes, 24% usage) to reach 18 points despite a quiet free-throw line. Her true shooting of 60% was well above her season baseline, allowing her to clear 16.5 on moderate shot attempts.
  • Leonie Fiebich Over 1.5 AST1 vs 1.5no clean explanationFiebich played 29 minutes but recorded just 1 assist on 9% usage, falling one short of the 1.5 line; she was primarily a scorer/rebounder (7 pts, 3 reb) rather than a playmaker in this game.
LVA @ IND9–2+4.13u
  • A'ja Wilson Over 2.5 AST2 vs 2.5shots didn't fall — the read held upWilson's assist total fell short despite heavy offensive usage (29%), as she took 16 shot attempts and 13 free throws, leaving limited ball-movement opportunities in a game where Las Vegas struggled overall (-16 rating). Four turnovers and a shoot-first role in a competitive contest limited her playmaking ceiling.
  • Caitlin Clark Under 10.5 AST15 vs 10.5no clean explanationClark's 15 assists came in a high-volume offensive game (32% usage, 68% TS%) where she dominated as the primary playmaker, easily clearing the 10.5 line. The under was a misjudgment of her usage rate and the offensive pace of a game where Indiana controlled the tempo.
09/2741–2661%+4.59u4 games

permalink to 2026-09-27 →

WAS @ ATL7–10−4.71u
  • Angel Reese Over 2.5 AST1 vs 2.5shots didn't fall — the read held upReese recorded just 1 assist despite 30 minutes played, as her offensive role centered on scoring and rebounding (13 points, 12 rebounds) rather than facilitating—she turned the ball over only once but generated minimal playmaking opportunities in Chicago's balanced attack.
  • Naz Hillmon Over 6.5 PTS4 vs 6.5shots didn't fall — the read held upHillmon's 20 minutes and 8% usage were both well below her typical workload, limiting her to just 2 made field goals despite solid efficiency, and she didn't attempt a free throw to compensate.
  • Naz Hillmon Over 3.5 REB3 vs 3.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upHillmon fell one rebound short despite playing 20 minutes, held back by minimal usage (8%) and a box-out role that limited her opportunities on the glass in a game without significant volume demands.
  • Michaela Onyenwere Under 2.5 REB4 vs 2.5shots didn't fall — the read held upOnyenwere grabbed 4 rebounds in 26 minutes despite shooting just 3-9 from the field, as she stayed active on the glass even when her offensive touches weren't falling. The under missed because she reached the mark through volume availability rather than efficiency—she logged solid floor time and pulled down boards at a reasonable rate despite the poor shooting night.
  • Allisha Gray Over 2.5 AST0 vs 2.5shots didn't fall — the read held upGray was a pure scorer tonight, posting 22 points on efficient shooting (60% TS) but recorded zero assists despite 35 minutes of play—she operated almost exclusively as a volume scorer rather than a facilitator, with her 23% usage channeled entirely into shot attempts rather than playmaking.
  • Angel Reese Over 14.5 PTS13 vs 14.5 — missed by a hairpaid over the fair numberReese fell just short despite solid volume (25% usage, 30 minutes), hamstrung by a brutal 4-15 shooting night (27% FG) that left her one point shy of the over. She made up ground at the free-throw line (4-5) and on the glass (12 rebounds), but the inefficient shooting was the decisive factor in missing 14.5 points.
IND @ LVA5–6−2.64u
  • A'ja Wilson Over 2.5 AST2 vs 2.5shots didn't fall — the read held upWilson's historic scoring efficiency (15-19 FG, 86% TS) made her the focal point of the offense, but her high usage rate (32%) and dominant post presence left little opportunity for playmaking—she recorded just 2 assists despite 35 minutes of elite individual scoring.
  • A'ja Wilson Under 9.5 REB16 vs 9.5shots didn't fall — the read held upWilson's elite efficiency (15-19 FG, 86% TS) kept her on the floor for all 35 minutes, and her 32% usage rate generated enough possessions to rack up 16 boards—well above the 9.5 line despite only fouling three times in a blowout win.
  • Sophie Cunningham Under 7.5 PTS13 vs 7.5no clean explanationCunningham's perfect 4-4 free-throw shooting and 50% three-point efficiency (3-6) pushed her to 13 points despite modest volume, nearly doubling the under as she converted at an elite 84% true shooting clip in 29 minutes.
  • Chelsea Gray Under 12.5 PTS14 vs 12.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upGray's efficient 4-8 shooting (50% FG) combined with a 6-7 free-throw line performance pushed her past the under despite modest volume, as she capitalized on high-efficiency looks in 34 minutes of play.
  • Chelsea Gray Under 13.5 PTS14 vs 13.5 — missed by a hairpaid over the fair numberGray pushed just over the line with 14 points on efficient 63% true shooting, converting 6-of-7 free throws to make up for modest field-goal volume (4-8 FG) in her 34 minutes of play.
  • A'ja Wilson Under 10.5 REB16 vs 10.5shots didn't fall — the read held upWilson dominated the glass with 16 rebounds in 35 minutes, fueled by her elite 79% field-goal rate (15-19) that kept her on the floor and offensive rebounding opportunities alive in a blowout win (+29).
DAL @ GSV12–8+1.01u
  • Awak Kuier Over 5.5 REB4 vs 5.5paid over the fair numberKuier fell one rebound short despite playing 20 minutes, hampered by poor offensive efficiency (1-5 FG) that limited her involvement and kept her off the glass in a lopsided game where she finished -25. Her 15% usage rate indicates minimal touches and opportunities to crash the boards.
  • Arike Ogunbowale Over 13.5 PTS10 vs 13.5paid over the fair numberOgunbowale shot just 2-7 from the field despite playing 26 minutes, and while she converted all six free throws, the inefficient field-goal performance (28.6% FG) left her three points short of the over. Her 21% usage rate and modest 52% true shooting capped her scoring ceiling in a game where Dallas fell into a blowout (-31 +/-).
  • Gabby Williams Under 3.5 AST4 vs 3.5 — missed by a hairpaid over the fair numberWilliams exceeded the assist line by one, reaching 4 dimes while playing a full 27 minutes with high usage (30%), giving her plenty of opportunities to facilitate in a blowout win (+27).
  • Kayla Thornton Under 4.5 REB5 vs 4.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upThornton grabbed exactly one more rebound than the line predicted, finishing with 5 boards in 19 minutes of solid efficiency (4-6 FG, 83% TS); the under missed by the slimmest margin despite her limited role and low usage rate.
  • Gabby Williams Under 16.5 PTS20 vs 16.5shots didn't fall — the read held upWilliams shot 50% from the field (8-16) and maintained efficient scoring throughout her 27 minutes, easily clearing the 16.5-point threshold with 20 points on high volume and elite True Shooting percentage (58%).
  • Paige Bueckers Over 4.5 AST2 vs 4.5shots didn't fall — the read held upBueckers generated only 2 assists despite efficient scoring (9-10 FG) because her 23% usage rate—concentrated heavily on shot attempts rather than playmaking—limited her ball-handling and creation opportunities. The game's blowout margin (-23 +/-) likely compressed the offensive flow and reduced her role as a facilitator.
NYL @ MIN17–2+10.93u
  • Breanna Stewart Under 22.5 PTS34 vs 22.5paid over the fair numberStewart torched the under with elite efficiency, shooting 11-18 from the field and 10-12 from the stripe for a 73% true shooting rate while logging a game-high 38 minutes in a blowout. Her 34% usage rate and near-perfect free-throw shooting (83%) transformed what looked like a modest scoring line into a 34-point performance.
  • Breanna Stewart Under 9.5 REB12 vs 9.5shots didn't fall — the read held upStewart dominated the glass with 12 rebounds across 38 minutes of heavy usage (34%), converting at an elite 73% TS and staying out of foul trouble (3 PF), far exceeding the 9.5 threshold.
09/243–350%−0.94u3 games

permalink to 2026-09-24 →

IND @ MIN0–3−3.00u
  • Caitlin Clark Over 21.5 PTS2 vs 21.5paid over the fair numberClark shot 1-12 from the field and 0-7 from three, combining for just 2 points in 18 minutes despite 30% usage, as historically poor efficiency derailed the over by 19.5 points. The 8% true shooting percentage was the primary culprit—she simply couldn't convert looks that were available within her usage rate.
  • Caitlin Clark Over 20.5 PTS2 vs 20.5paid over the fair numberClark shot 1-12 from the field and 0-7 from three despite 30% usage, posting an 8% true shooting percentage—a historically poor offensive night that made the 20.5-point line impossible to reach. Her 18 minutes of playing time compounded the issue, leaving her with insufficient volume to overcome the shooting collapse.
  • Caitlin Clark Over 19.5 PTS2 vs 19.5paid over the fair numberClark shot 1-12 from the field and 0-7 from three on 30% usage, combining historically poor efficiency with limited volume to fall far short of the 19.5-point line. Her 18 minutes of action and lopsided +/- (-27) suggest Iowa was blown out early, limiting scoring opportunities.
LVA @ PHO1–0+0.65u
CHI @ WAS2–0+1.41u
09/239–756%−0.20u2 games

permalink to 2026-09-23 →

ATL @ NYL6–7−2.14u
  • Angel Reese Over 10.5 REB6 vs 10.5no clean explanationReese was limited to just 17 minutes—5-7 below her season average—which capped her rebounding opportunities at 6, well short of the 10.5 line. The limited run was the decisive factor, as her rebounding rate would have easily cleared the over with standard playing time.
  • Angel Reese Over 14.5 PTS6 vs 14.5no clean explanationReese was held to just 6 points on 2-7 shooting (29% FG) in only 17 minutes, well short of the 14.5-point line. Limited offensive opportunity and poor efficiency combined to make the over a non-factor.
  • Leonie Fiebich Over 2.5 REB2 vs 2.5shots didn't fall — the read held upFiebich fell one rebound short despite playing 16 minutes, collecting just 2 boards on a night when low usage (12%) and a scoreless performance (0-1 FG) limited her opportunities to crash the glass.
  • Rhyne Howard Over 15.5 PTS8 vs 15.5shots didn't fall — the read held upHoward shot just 4-of-12 (33% FG) and 0-of-5 from three despite playing 34 minutes, unable to generate scoring efficiency even with the volume to hit over 15.5 points.
  • Leonie Fiebich Over 1.5 AST0 vs 1.5shots didn't fall — the read held upFiebich was a non-factor in 16 minutes with just 2 rebounds and 3 turnovers, recording zero assists despite 12% usage; she failed to generate any playmaking opportunities in a limited role.
  • Angel Reese Over 15.5 PTS6 vs 15.5shots didn't fall — the read held upReese's scoring collapsed due to severe shooting inefficiency (2-7 FG, 28.6% from the field) and limited opportunities, finishing with just 17 minutes and 21% usage—well below the workload needed to reach 15.5 points.
DAL @ SEA3–0+1.95u
09/2212–1348%−3.15u5 games

permalink to 2026-09-22 →

LAS @ LVA0–4−4.00u
  • Rae Burrell Over 2.5 AST0 vs 2.5paid over the fair numberBurrell's playmaking disappeared despite 29 minutes and solid usage; she recorded zero assists while turning the ball over four times, suggesting poor decision-making and an inability to create for teammates in a low-efficiency outing (41% TS).
  • Jackie Young Under 4.5 REB5 vs 4.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upYoung's heavy 34-minute workload and 27% usage rate—playing nearly the full game as the primary ball-handler—gave her enough opportunities to grab 5 boards despite shooting just 6-16 from the field, pushing past the 4.5 rebound line.
  • Rae Burrell Over 15.5 PTS11 vs 15.5paid over the fair numberBurrell's inefficient 4-12 shooting (33% FG) and 0-2 from three combined with modest free-throw volume (3 attempts) left her 4.5 points shy despite 29 minutes of play. Her 29% usage rate proved insufficient to generate the scoring volume needed to clear the 15.5-point threshold.
  • Chelsea Gray Under 11.5 PTS17 vs 11.5paid over the fair numberGray torched the under on an efficient 7-12 shooting night (58% FG) with extended 33-minute run, nearly doubling the 11.5-point line at 17 points. Her 68% true shooting and zero fouls allowed her to stay on court and capitalize on a high-volume opportunity despite modest 21% usage.
GSV @ POR1–4−3.24u
  • Kayla Thornton Under 3.5 REB7 vs 3.5paid over the fair numberThornton nearly doubled the over/under by grabbing 7 boards in 26 minutes, benefiting from elevated opportunity on a night when her team needed rebounding help and she drew only 2 fouls despite heavy box-out work.
  • Kayla Thornton Under 9.5 PTS11 vs 9.5shots didn't fall — the read held upThornton's efficient 62% true shooting on 20% usage was enough to clear the 9.5-point line, converting 4-of-8 from the field and both her three-point attempts in 26 minutes despite modest volume.
  • Kayla Thornton Under 8.5 PTS11 vs 8.5shots didn't fall — the read held upThornton exceeded the under despite modest volume, converting 4-of-8 from the field (50%) and 2-of-4 from three (50%) on 26 minutes to reach 11 points, as efficient shooting made up for her low usage rate of just 20%.
  • Kayla Thornton Under 4.5 REB7 vs 4.5shots didn't fall — the read held upThornton grabbed 7 rebounds in 26 minutes, exceeding the 4.5 line by collecting 3 extra boards despite modest usage (20%) and shooting efficiency (62% TS%), likely benefiting from active interior presence and limited competition for available rebounds.
CON @ WAS1–2−1.25u
  • Kiki Iriafen Over 9.5 REB5 vs 9.5shots didn't fall — the read held upIriafen fell well short with just 5 rebounds due to a combination of limited minutes (18) and early foul trouble (5 PF), which restricted her ability to crash the glass and accumulate the volume needed to clear 9.5.
  • Sonia Citron Over 4.5 AST3 vs 4.5shots didn't fall — the read held upCitron fell just short at 3 assists despite playing 30 minutes; she operated with only 19% usage and didn't generate enough offensive opportunities to reach 5 dimes, relying heavily on her scoring (6-6 FT) rather than playmaking.
TOR @ CHI2–1+0.79u
  • Sydney Taylor Under 15.5 PTS18 vs 15.5shots didn't fall — the read held upTaylor exceeded the under with efficient shooting, going 5-12 from the field (42%) with a perfect 5-5 from free throw while maintaining 31% usage over 24 minutes. Her 63% true shooting and aggressive free throw attempts (5 attempts) proved the scoring floor was higher than the 15.5-point line anticipated.
MIN @ IND8–2+4.56u
  • Natasha Howard Over 11.5 PTS6 vs 11.5shots didn't fall — the read held upHoward played just 12 minutes and shot 2-for-5 from the field, combining for only 6 points well short of the 11.5 target; limited run and inefficient scoring made the over impossible to hit.
  • Natasha Howard Over 10.5 PTS6 vs 10.5shots didn't fall — the read held upHoward played just 12 minutes and shot 2-for-5 from the field, limiting her to 6 points well short of the 10.5 line; the minimal playing time and modest usage rate (27%) prevented her from accumulating scoring opportunities.
09/215–936%−5.42u2 games

permalink to 2026-09-21 →

ATL @ NYL3–9−6.95u
  • Breanna Stewart Under 8.5 REB14 vs 8.5shots didn't fall — the read held upStewart dominated the glass with 14 rebounds on 37 minutes and 31% usage, nearly doubling the 8.5 line as the team's primary frontcourt presence in a low-scoring affair where boards were heavily contested.
  • Leonie Fiebich Over 2.5 REB2 vs 2.5shots didn't fall — the read held upFiebich played 32 minutes but finished with just 2 rebounds, one short of the line, due to minimal offensive involvement (5% usage, 0-3 from the field) that limited her opportunities to crash the glass in a game where she was ineffective on the perimeter.
  • Pauline Astier Under 3.5 AST4 vs 3.5 — missed by a hairpaid over the fair numberAstier exceeded the 3.5 assist line by hitting exactly 4 dimes in 30 minutes of play, benefiting from efficient offensive execution (76% TS%) that likely created more ball-movement opportunities despite her modest 15% usage rate.
  • Jonquel Jones Under 2.5 AST4 vs 2.5shots didn't fall — the read held upJones exceeded the assist line by distributing the ball from the post in 35 minutes of heavy usage (22%), recording 4 dimes while dominating the glass with 12 rebounds. Her elevated role as a facilitator—typical for a big handling the ball in the mid-post—pushed her playmaking volume just beyond the low 2.5 threshold.
  • Allisha Gray Over 2.5 AST1 vs 2.5shots didn't fall — the read held upGray's usage rate sat at just 16%, well below what's needed to generate assist opportunities, and she recorded only 1 dime despite playing 32 minutes—a clear indicator the offense ran through other creators rather than her facilitating. She compensated with efficient scoring (5-8 FG), but low volume and assist distribution prevented her from reaching the 2.5 assists threshold.
  • Angel Reese Over 2.5 AST2 vs 2.5shots didn't fall — the read held upReese's ball-handling was minimal despite 34 minutes and heavy usage (25%), finishing with only 2 assists as she operated primarily as a scorer and rebounder rather than a playmaker. She drew 4 fouls, which limited her aggression and floor time in key stretches where she might have generated extra dimes.
DAL @ PHO2–0+1.53u
09/2015–865%+3.81u5 games

permalink to 2026-09-20 →

POR @ LAS0–2−2.00u
  • Rae Burrell Over 2.5 AST2 vs 2.5shots didn't fall — the read held upBurrell fell one assist short despite an efficient 25 minutes and elite scoring (20 pts on 84% TS), as her shot-heavy usage (25%) left little margin for playmaking duties. With only 2 turnovers and minimal ball-handling responsibilities in the flow of the offense, she simply didn't generate enough assist opportunities to clear the 2.5 line.
  • Ariel Atkins Under 7.5 PTS14 vs 7.5shots didn't fall — the read held upAtkins was remarkably efficient, converting 5 of 7 from the field (71%) with perfect 3-for-3 free-throw shooting to nearly double the betting line despite playing just 20 minutes. Her elite 84% true shooting and hot hand from the floor—particularly from inside the arc—overcame the limited minutes that would typically support an under bet.
WAS @ IND5–4−0.26u
  • Kelsey Mitchell Over 25.5 PTS22 vs 25.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upMitchell fell just short despite heavy minutes (35) and usage (29%), hampered by poor shooting efficiency—she connected on just 8-of-20 FG (40%) and 3-of-10 from three, leaving her three points shy of the line.
  • Kelsey Mitchell Over 1.5 REB0 vs 1.5paid over the fair numberMitchell played 35 minutes and took 20 shots but failed to grab a single rebound despite 29% usage, unable to convert her offensive opportunities into board work. Her scoring volume masked a complete absence of rebounding activity—a rare outcome for a guard in heavy rotation that left the over vulnerable.
  • Shakira Austin Under 9.5 REB10 vs 9.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upAustin grabbed one board over the line, finishing with 10 rebounds on 26 minutes of play while drawing only 3 fouls—enough activity to stay on the court and collect boards at a modest rate that pushed her just past the 9.5 threshold.
  • Kelsey Mitchell Over 24.5 PTS22 vs 24.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upMitchell fell two points short despite playing 35 minutes, hampered by inefficient shooting (8-20 FG, 3-10 3PT) that yielded just 52% true shooting—well below her typical efficiency needed to clear 24.5 points.
SEA @ LVA3–1+1.50u
  • Flau'jae Johnson Under 4.5 REB6 vs 4.5shots didn't fall — the read held upJohnson grabbed two more rebounds than the line anticipated, finishing with 6 boards on 32 minutes of heavy usage (33%) in a game where she was heavily involved on both ends of the floor.
NYL @ TOR4–1+1.93u
  • Marine Johannes Under 6.5 PTS9 vs 6.5shots didn't fall — the read held upJohannes exceeded the line by shooting 3-for-8 from three, converting at 37.5% from deep to reach 9 points in 18 minutes—enough volume in limited time to clear the 6.5-point threshold despite modest overall efficiency.
MIN @ CON3–0+2.65u
09/1913–1057%+1.54u3 games

permalink to 2026-09-19 →

CHI @ ATL3–5−2.55u
  • Naz Hillmon Over 4.5 REB4 vs 4.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upHillmon fell one rebound short despite playing 19 minutes, hampered by dismal 0-5 shooting that likely limited her interior activity and offensive rebounding opportunities. Her 13% usage rate suggests limited involvement in the offense, reducing the number of possessions and second-chance situations that typically generate rebound volume.
  • Naz Hillmon Over 7.5 PTS2 vs 7.5shots didn't fall — the read held upHillmon shot 0-for-5 from the field and generated only 13% usage in 19 minutes, leaving her entirely dependent on free throws for scoring and unable to reach 8 points. Her 17% true shooting percentage reflects a near-complete offensive drought that rendered the over unplayable.
  • Rhyne Howard Over 16.5 PTS14 vs 16.5paid over the fair numberHoward fell just short despite efficient shooting (71% TS on 18% usage) because her 24 minutes and modest volume—only 9 FG attempts—capped her scoring at 14 points, two shy of the line.
  • Kamilla Cardoso Over 12.5 PTS11 vs 12.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upCardoso's efficient 5-7 shooting (71%) wasn't enough to clear 12.5 points due to limited minutes (19) and usage (24%), holding her to 11 points despite a strong True Shooting percentage.
  • Rhyne Howard Over 17.5 PTS14 vs 17.5shots didn't fall — the read held upHoward shot efficiently (71% TS) but saw limited volume with just 18% usage and 24 minutes, falling 3.5 points short of the over despite solid shooting splits (5-9 FG, 3-6 3PT).
PHO @ DAL3–2+0.46u
  • Awak Kuier Under 9.5 PTS11 vs 9.5shots didn't fall — the read held upKuier's perfect 4-for-4 shooting from the field (including 1-for-1 from three) on limited 27 minutes was the outlier—she converted at 100% TS despite her low 9% usage rate, pushing her just over the 9.5 line despite minimal offensive involvement.
  • Alyssa Thomas Under 15.5 PTS19 vs 15.5shots didn't fall — the read held upThomas torched the under with an efficient 8-11 shooting night (72.7% FG), converting nearly three-quarters of her attempts from the field to reach 19 points despite modest usage at 22%. Her elite scoring efficiency—well above her season baseline—was the difference maker in pushing past the 15.5-point threshold.
SEA @ GSV7–3+3.63u
  • Natisha Hiedeman Over 4.5 AST3 vs 4.5shots didn't fall — the read held upHiedeman fell just short despite playing 30 minutes, finishing with only 3 assists due to low offensive involvement—her 11% usage rate and 2-5 shooting kept her off the ball and limited playmaking opportunities.
  • Flau'jae Johnson Under 4.5 REB5 vs 4.5 — missed by a hairno clean explanationJohnson grabbed one more board than the line despite inefficient shooting (6-18 FG), staying on the court for 34 minutes and maintaining high usage (34%) to accumulate volume opportunities on the glass.
  • Kayla Thornton Under 4.5 REB6 vs 4.5shots didn't fall — the read held upThornton grabbed 6 rebounds in 30 minutes despite shooting 0-for-6, as her role shifted toward perimeter defense and rebounding activity rather than offensive usage. The 9% usage rate and scoreless night limited her impact elsewhere, but high playing time ensured she collected enough boards to clear the 4.5 line.
09/188–753%−0.84u3 games

permalink to 2026-09-18 →

POR @ GSV1–2−1.21u
  • Kayla Thornton Under 10.5 PTS13 vs 10.5paid over the fair numberThornton exceeded the under despite modest efficiency (4-10 FG), hitting 3-of-8 from three to reach 13 points in 25 minutes with elevated usage at 23%, relying on volume rather than shooting accuracy to push past the 10.5 line.
  • Kayla Thornton Under 9.5 PTS13 vs 9.5paid over the fair numberThornton exceeded the under on efficient scoring, going 4-10 from the field with a 3-8 clip from three to reach 13 points in 25 minutes of solid role-player production. Her 57% true shooting and 23% usage rate kept her on pace to clear 9.5 despite modest volume.
NYL @ MIN3–2+0.15u
  • Courtney Williams Over 3.5 AST2 vs 3.5shots didn't fall — the read held upWilliams played 29 minutes with low usage (19%) in a blowout loss, recording only 2 assists despite 5 rebounds, suggesting limited offensive flow and playmaking opportunities in a game that didn't require sustained ball movement. Five fouls also may have constrained her aggression late, limiting her ability to generate additional assists.
  • Breanna Stewart Under 8.5 REB10 vs 8.5shots didn't fall — the read held upStewart grabbed two boards beyond the line in 38 full minutes of action, capitalizing on her team's offensive rebounding opportunities in a blowout win (+13). Her elite efficiency (58% TS) and high usage kept her on the floor throughout, providing extra chances to clean the glass.
IND @ TOR4–3+0.22u
  • Caitlin Clark Under 4.5 REB6 vs 4.5shots didn't fall — the read held upClark grabbed one more rebound than the line anticipated, finishing with 6 boards across 34 minutes of heavy usage (39%) in a game Indiana won by 10, staying active on the glass despite her primary role as a scorer and facilitator.
  • Kiki Rice Under 3.5 REB6 vs 3.5no clean explanationRice doubled her rebounding projection with 6 boards in 29 minutes, benefiting from elevated usage (34%) and activity that extended beyond her typical scoring role in a competitive game.
  • Isabelle Harrison Under 15.5 PTS16 vs 15.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upHarrison's 6-for-11 free-throw shooting (55%) provided the cushion needed to sneak over 15.5 despite a poor 4-for-13 field-goal night, as her 32 minutes and 24% usage were enough to generate scoring opportunities from the line.
09/1716–1650%−3.60u5 games

permalink to 2026-09-17 →

CON @ ATL5–7−2.61u
  • Rhyne Howard Over 19.5 PTS10 vs 19.5no clean explanationHoward shot just 3-14 from the field (21% FG) and 1-9 from three (11%), combining for a 32% true shooting percentage that fell well short of what was needed to reach 20 points even with 28 minutes played.
  • Aaliyah Edwards Over 12.5 PTS7 vs 12.5no clean explanationEdwards shot just 3-8 from the field (37.5%) with only 16 minutes of action, limiting her scoring well short of the 12.5-point line. Four fouls in a blowout loss (-27) further restricted her opportunity to get back on track.
  • Rhyne Howard Over 17.5 PTS10 vs 17.5paid over the fair numberHoward's inefficiency at the rim doomed the over: she shot just 3-14 from the field (21%) and 1-9 from three (11%), combining for a dismal 32% TS despite adequate playing time and usage at 28 minutes and 27% usage rate.
  • Rhyne Howard Over 18.5 PTS10 vs 18.5shots didn't fall — the read held upHoward's shot selection and efficiency collapsed: she went 3-14 from the field (21% FG) and 1-9 from three despite playing 28 minutes, leaving her 8.5 points shy of the over despite solid playmaking (8 ast, 4 stl).
  • Jordin Canada Over 10.5 PTS5 vs 10.5shots didn't fall — the read held upCanada shot just 2-for-5 from the field despite 21 minutes of run, combining for only 5 points on poor 40% FG and 0-for-3 from three; her 13% usage rate and inability to convert scoring chances were the primary culprits in missing the over by nearly half.
  • Jordin Canada Over 9.5 PTS5 vs 9.5no clean explanationCanada shot just 2-5 from the field (40%) and 0-3 from three despite getting 21 minutes, unable to generate enough scoring volume to clear 9.5 points. Her 13% usage rate—lowest tier for a starter—left her with insufficient opportunities to reach the target.
WAS @ CHI1–2−1.25u
  • Kamilla Cardoso Over 13.5 PTS10 vs 13.5paid over the fair numberCardoso's 10 points fell short of 13.5 despite solid volume (11 FG attempts), as she converted just 5 shots (45% FG) and took zero free throws in 23 minutes—a below-average efficiency night that couldn't overcome her limited offensive output. Four fouls in limited minutes also likely restricted her aggressive play late in the game.
  • Kamilla Cardoso Over 12.5 PTS10 vs 12.5paid over the fair numberCardoso fell short of 12.5 despite solid volume (11 FG attempts), hampered by poor efficiency at 45.5% TS and zero free-throw attempts that limited her scoring upside. Foul trouble (6 PF in 23 minutes) likely curtailed her aggression and playing time in a blowout loss.
PHO @ POR1–1−0.30u
  • Alyssa Thomas Under 15.5 PTS18 vs 15.5shots didn't fall — the read held upThomas torched the under with efficient inside scoring, converting 6 of 8 from the field (75%) while getting to the free-throw line 10 times in 31 minutes, offsetting her zero three-pointers with dominant paint production.
LVA @ SEA3–2+0.28u
  • A'ja Wilson Under 26.5 PTS29 vs 26.5 — missed by a hairpaid over the fair numberWilson's perfect 10-10 free-throw shooting and elite 69% two-point conversion (8-of-11) powered her to 29 points despite modest usage, as her 83% true shooting easily cleared the 26.5 line. She stayed out of foul trouble with just 3 PF in 29 minutes, allowing her to maintain high-efficiency offense throughout the game.
  • Chelsea Gray Under 3.5 REB9 vs 3.5shots didn't fall — the read held upGray crashed the glass hard despite minimal offensive involvement, pulling down 9 rebounds in 26 minutes—more than double the projected total—as a primary rebounder in a game where Las Vegas controlled pace and rebounding opportunities.
LAS @ DAL6–4+0.28u
  • Jessica Shepard Under 10.5 REB11 vs 10.5 — missed by a hairno clean explanationShepard grabbed 11 boards in 28 minutes, just clearing the number despite modest 22% usage, as her team's +18 margin and defensive rebounding opportunities kept her in high-volume rebound situations.
  • Rae Burrell Over 14.5 PTS12 vs 14.5no clean explanationBurrell shot just 5-14 from the field (36%) and 1-4 from three despite 24 minutes and 27% usage, falling two points short of the 14.5 line. Her inefficient shooting night, combined with limited free-throw attempts (1-1), prevented her from reaching the scoring threshold.
  • Jessica Shepard Under 5.5 AST12 vs 5.5shots didn't fall — the read held upShepard's playmaking was the engine of her impact despite modest scoring, dishing 12 assists on 28 minutes of floor time while maintaining efficiency (55% TS%) and recording a team-leading +18, nearly doubling the 5.5 assist line. Her ball movement and high-volume involvement in the offense—facilitated by low foul trouble (2 PF)—drove her well above the projection.
  • Maddy Siegrist Under 8.5 PTS12 vs 8.5paid over the fair numberSiegrist converted 5 of 10 from the field (50% FG) and 2 of 5 from three for 12 points in 23 minutes, exceeding the 8.5-point line through efficient shooting rather than elevated usage (17%). She stayed out of foul trouble with only 3 personal fouls, allowing her to play her typical role without restriction.
08/3022–1461%+4.06u4 games

permalink to 2026-08-30 →

MIN @ ATL4–8−5.27u
  • Angel Reese Over 2.5 AST2 vs 2.5shots didn't fall — the read held upReese fell one assist short despite 33 minutes and heavy involvement (22% usage, 11 rebounds), as her ball-handling struggles—5 turnovers in limited playmaking opportunities—kept her from the 3+ assists threshold.
  • Naz Hillmon Over 4.5 REB3 vs 4.5shots didn't fall — the read held upHillmon played a full 30 minutes but couldn't secure boards despite adequate opportunity, finishing with just 3 rebounds on 18% usage and a poor 3-9 shooting line that likely limited her presence around the rim.
  • Rhyne Howard Over 16.5 PTS16 vs 16.5 — missed by a hairno clean explanationHoward fell one point short despite heavy playing time (35 min), held back by inefficient shooting (6-16 FG, 2-9 3PT) that kept her TS% at 47%—well below her season average and insufficient to push her over 16.5.
  • Rhyne Howard Over 18.5 PTS16 vs 18.5 — missed by a hairno clean explanationHoward's inefficient 6-16 shooting night (37.5% FG, 22% from three) left her two points shy despite logging heavy minutes, as poor shot selection and limited free-throw opportunities (2-2 on just 2 attempts) prevented her from reaching the 18.5 threshold.
  • Kayla McBride Under 2.5 AST3 vs 2.5no clean explanationMcBride hit the over by a single assist despite modest usage (20%), benefiting from extended floor time (37 minutes) that created enough playmaking opportunities to reach 3 dimes.
  • Rhyne Howard Over 17.5 PTS16 vs 17.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upHoward fell one point short despite heavy usage (35 min, 20% usage rate), undone by poor shooting efficiency—she connected on just 6-of-16 from the field (37.5% FG) and 2-of-9 from three, both well below her season norms. The 47% true shooting wasn't enough volume to reach 18 points, the realistic threshold for a profitable over.
GSV @ POR5–5−0.61u
  • Kayla Thornton Under 7.5 PTS17 vs 7.5shots didn't fall — the read held upThornton torched the under with elite efficiency, shooting 5-8 from the field and 3-5 from three while posting a 87% true shooting percentage in 25 minutes—nearly double the scoring needed to clear 7.5 points on just 19% usage.
  • Megan DiLeo Over 13.5 PTS12 vs 13.5 — missed by a hairpaid over the fair numberDiLeo fell just short despite efficient shooting (60% FG), limited by 24 minutes of run and a 23% usage rate in a game where the team's offensive load was distributed elsewhere. One made three-pointer instead of going 0-for-3 from deep would have cleared the line.
  • Kayla Thornton Under 8.5 PTS17 vs 8.5shots didn't fall — the read held upThornton's efficient 5-8 shooting night (62.5% FG, 60% from three) easily doubled the expected output, and her 25 minutes of run time at 19% usage provided the volume to cash in on her hot shooting from the field and foul line (4-4 FT).
  • Kiah Stokes Over 5.5 REB1 vs 5.5shots didn't fall — the read held upStokes was limited to just 12 minutes and recorded only 1 rebound, as her minimal playing time and 0% usage rate prevented her from approaching the 5.5 rebound threshold.
  • Kaitlyn Chen Under 9.5 PTS15 vs 9.5shots didn't fall — the read held upChen torched the under with an efficient 5-8 shooting night (62.5% FG, 60% from three) while playing a full 27 minutes, combining volume and accuracy to nearly double the 9.5-point projection.
CON @ DAL4–1+2.14u
  • Awak Kuier Over 8.5 PTS4 vs 8.5no clean explanationKuier's 4 points fell well short of the 8.5-point line due to minimal offensive involvement—she posted just 7% usage and took only 2 field-goal attempts despite playing 20 minutes. Though she was efficient when she did shoot (50% FG, 100% FT), the volume simply wasn't there to reach the over.
LAS @ SEA9–0+7.81u
08/296–275%+2.14u2 games

permalink to 2026-08-29 →

CHI @ NYL1–1−0.43u
  • Breanna Stewart Under 8.5 REB9 vs 8.5 — missed by a hairno clean explanationStewart grabbed one extra rebound to push past the line, fueled by 26 minutes of floor time and active interior presence with 2 blocks that kept her in rebounding position despite modest 4-11 shooting.
TOR @ PHO5–1+2.57u
  • Alyssa Thomas Over 7.5 REB6 vs 7.5shots didn't fall — the read held upThomas fell one rebound short despite solid floor time (22 min), held back by low volume—her 14% usage and pass-first role (12 assists) limited her opportunities on the glass in a blowout win (+38).
08/2813–572%+6.17u4 games

permalink to 2026-08-28 →

WAS @ LAS2–1+0.55u
  • Sonia Citron Under 17.5 PTS22 vs 17.5shots didn't fall — the read held upCitron exceeded the under by hitting 50% from three (4-7) and shot efficiently overall at 60% TS despite modest volume, posting 22 points in 32 minutes to easily clear 17.5.
CON @ IND3–1+1.50u
  • Caitlin Clark Under 4.5 REB5 vs 4.5 — missed by a hairno clean explanationClark grabbed one more rebound than the line allowed, finishing with 5 boards in 34 minutes of heavy usage (34%) while playing efficiently and staying out of foul trouble (4 PF), which kept her on the floor and in position to crash the glass.
POR @ ATL4–2+1.80u
  • Bridget Carleton Over 14.5 PTS4 vs 14.5shots didn't fall — the read held upCarleton was ice-cold from the field, shooting just 1-6 (17%) with 0-3 from three despite playing 33 minutes, and her 10% usage rate left her with minimal scoring opportunities in the game. Even with free throws, she could only muster 4 points—well short of 14.5—on a historically poor 29% true shooting night.
  • Carla Leite Under 2.5 REB3 vs 2.5shots didn't fall — the read held upLeite grabbed 3 rebounds in 29 minutes, just one more than the under's threshold, as her elite scoring efficiency (9-13 FG, 88% TS) kept her heavily involved on offense rather than crashing the glass.
TOR @ LVA4–1+2.31u
  • Isabelle Harrison Over 7.5 REB7 vs 7.5 — missed by a hairno clean explanationHarrison came up one rebound short despite solid 24 minutes and high usage (36%), held back by limited opportunities on the glass—she grabbed only 7 boards while shooting just 5-for-14 from the field in a game where her team was outrebounded.
08/274–736%−4.30u2 games

permalink to 2026-08-27 →

GSV @ NYL2–4−2.59u
  • Sabrina Ionescu Over 3.5 REB2 vs 3.5shots didn't fall — the read held upIonescu's inefficiency (2-12 FG, 27% TS) and modest 26% usage rate limited her opportunities to crash the glass, while her 29 minutes—typical for her role—weren't enough to generate the necessary volume at a position where she averaged limited rebounding activity. The blowout loss (-17 +/-) also reduced garbage-time opportunities that could've pushed her toward the over.
  • Pauline Astier Over 6.5 PTS4 vs 6.5shots didn't fall — the read held upAstier's ice-cold 2-6 shooting (33% TS) left her stuck at 4 points despite 24 minutes of run, as poor shot selection and execution prevented her from reaching the 6.5-point threshold. Her 16% usage rate compounded the issue, limiting her scoring opportunities in a game where she struggled to find rhythm offensively.
  • Janelle Salaun Under 4.5 REB7 vs 4.5no clean explanationSalaun exceeded the rebound total despite poor offensive efficiency (3-10 FG), grabbing 7 boards in 24 minutes—a 17.5 rebound rate that capitalized on high volume opportunities and her size advantage on the glass. The under missed because she stayed active on the boards even as her scoring touch completely deserted her (30% FG).
  • Cecilia Zandalasini Over 1.5 AST1 vs 1.5paid over the fair numberZandalasini played a high-volume scorer's role (29% usage, 20 pts on 8-17 shooting) with limited playmaking opportunities, recording just 1 assist across 31 minutes despite solid efficiency. The offensive-focused game script didn't create natural setup opportunities for an assist-heavy performance.
WAS @ PHO2–3−1.72u
  • Alyssa Thomas Over 13.5 PTS4 vs 13.5no clean explanationThomas was held to just 1-5 from the field (20% FG) despite playing 32 minutes, rendering her 11% usage rate irrelevant; the offensive inefficiency—compounded by zero 3-pointers—left her stranded well short of 13.5 points.
  • Shakira Austin Over 17.5 PTS11 vs 17.5no clean explanationAustin shot just 3-9 from the field despite playing 30 minutes, and her 17% usage rate—well below her season average—limited her scoring opportunities in a game where she didn't get enough offensive touches to reach 18+.
  • Shakira Austin Over 16.5 PTS11 vs 16.5no clean explanationAustin's 11 points fell short of 16.5 despite playing 30 minutes due to inefficient shooting (3-9 FG, 33%), as she relied heavily on free throws (5-5) to generate scoring rather than consistent field-goal production.
08/266–555%−0.65u2 games

permalink to 2026-08-26 →

TOR @ SEA3–4−1.46u
  • Isabelle Harrison Under 15.5 PTS17 vs 15.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upHarrison exceeded the under on volume rather than efficiency, taking 16 shots across 32 minutes (27% usage) and converting 7-of-10 free throws to reach 17 points despite shooting just 31% from the field and 0-for-4 from three. Her elevated free-throw attempts (10 FT) and heavy workload proved enough to clear 15.5 despite poor overall shooting splits.
  • Isabelle Harrison Under 14.5 PTS17 vs 14.5shots didn't fall — the read held upHarrison converted 7 of 10 free throws (70%) to reach 17 points despite shooting just 31% from the field, leaning heavily on free-throw volume to exceed the 14.5-point line. Her 32 minutes and 27% usage rate provided enough offensive opportunities for her to push over despite poor overall efficiency.
  • Jade Melbourne Under 6.5 AST7 vs 6.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upMelbourne pushed one assist over the line despite modest usage (19%), as she operated efficiently in 33 minutes and found cutters consistently in a game flow that favored ball movement with her low turnover rate (2 TOs).
  • Jade Melbourne Under 5.5 AST7 vs 5.5shots didn't fall — the read held upMelbourne eclipsed the 5.5 assist line by distributing the ball at elevated volume—she posted 7 assists across 33 minutes of heavy involvement, commanding 19% usage and operating as a primary playmaker in the offense. Her efficiency across all shot types (61% TS, 5-10 FG) kept her on the floor and in rhythm to generate multiple looks for teammates.
GSV @ CON3–1+0.81u
  • Kennedy Burke Over 9.5 PTS2 vs 9.5shots didn't fall — the read held upBurke shot just 1-5 from the field (20% FG) and missed both free-throw attempts despite 22 minutes of action, combining for only 2 points well below the 9.5 line. Her 12% usage rate and 17% true shooting percentage indicate she was both limited in touches and inefficient when she did get the ball.

Each eligible priced formula signal is normalized to a flat 1-unit outcome at its recorded price. Voids are excluded from the record, hit rate, and units. Open a day for the per-game split and loss review.