← scout_ml · WNBA
2026-07-12
Day by day
these are the scout_ml 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.
16–19 · 46% · −5.96u across the last 1 days
07/1216–1946%−5.96u4 games
CHI @ DAL1–7−6.18u
- Azura Stevens Under 1.5 3PM3 vs 1.5shots didn't fall — the read held upStevens hit 3-for-6 from three (50%), well above her recent L5 average of 1.6 and nearly double her fair-value expectation of 38.96% over, converting an unusually hot shooting night into the over result despite modest 24% usage.
- Natasha Cloud Under 19.5 PRA20 vs 19.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upCloud's efficient 62.5% FG mark (5-8) paired with a perfect 5-5 from the line powered her to exactly 20 PRA, narrowly clearing the 19.5 line despite modest volume and usage at just 18%.
- Natasha Cloud Under 14.5 PR17 vs 14.5shots didn't fall — the read held upCloud's efficient 5-8 shooting (62.5 FG%) and perfect 5-5 free-throw night pushed her to 15 points, while her 32 minutes of run time—the most she'd likely played in recent games at that usage rate—gave her enough opportunities to exceed the 14.5 line despite modest shot volume.
- Azura Stevens Under 19.5 PR31 vs 19.5paid over the fair numberStevens torched the Under with an elite 67% true shooting on 24% usage, combining 18 points and 13 rebounds to reach 31 PR in 32 minutes—the combination of high efficiency and heavy rebounding volume proved too much for the 19.5 line.
- Azura Stevens Under 12.5 PTS18 vs 12.5shots didn't fall — the read held upStevens shot an efficient 7-13 from the field (54%) with a 67% true shooting rate, well above her season norm, while logging 32 minutes and maintaining high usage at 24% to easily clear 12.5 points. The hot shooting night—particularly her 3-6 performance from three—was the primary driver in her exceeding the projection by 5.5 points.
- Azzi Fudd Under 2.5 AST3 vs 2.5paid over the fair numberFudd's playmaking role expanded in a high-usage game (35 min, 20% usage), and she hit the over mark with exactly 3 assists despite modest shooting efficiency (5-14 FG). The under missed by just one assist in a game where she was heavily involved in the offense.
NYL @ TOR8–11−4.84u
- Julie Allemand Under 3.5 REB5 vs 3.5no clean explanationAllemand's playmaking role (10 assists in 34 minutes) kept her active on the floor and in position to grab boards despite low scoring volume, resulting in 5 rebounds to exceed the 3.5 line.
- Maria Conde Under 16.5 PR17 vs 16.5 — missed by a hairshots didn't fall — the read held upConde's efficient 5-11 shooting (45% FG, 43% 3PT) and 34 minutes of play pushed her just over the line despite modest usage at 16%, as the +14 rating suggested she stayed on the court in a game flow favorable to her production.
- Julie Allemand Under 10.5 RA15 vs 10.5shots didn't fall — the read held upAllemand's 10 assists—well above her 6.5 average per her box—drove the miss, as she played heavy minutes (34) and facilitated heavily despite minimal scoring (4 pts on 50% TS). The under assumed her typical assist volume, but she posted a season-high distribution night that pushed her to 15 total rating.
- Sabrina Ionescu Under 2.5 3PM3 vs 2.5shots didn't fall — the read held upIonescu hit 3-of-7 from three (43%), exceeding her L10 average of 2.1 makes and converting at a clip well above her season norm despite modest volume. The elevated efficiency from deep—driven by hot shooting rather than increased attempts—was enough to clear the 2.5 line.
- Sabrina Ionescu Under 27.5 PRA40 vs 27.5shots didn't fall — the read held upIonescu exploded for 40 PRA on elite 65% true shooting and 8 assists, nearly doubling the under at 27.5 despite modest 26% usage—her efficient 9-18 shooting (50%) from the field and 7-8 free throws were the difference-makers in a high-volume scoring night.
- Sabrina Ionescu Under 21.5 PR32 vs 21.5no clean explanationIonescu torched the under with elite efficiency, shooting 65% TS and 9-18 from the field while playing all 33 available minutes without foul trouble, accumulating 32 points well above the 21.5 line. Her 26% usage rate and high-volume role in a game that didn't feature a blowout gave her plenty of scoring opportunities to exceed the projection.
SEA @ WAS4–1+2.51u
- Awa Fam Under 5.5 REB9 vs 5.5shots didn't fall — the read held upFam crushed the glass with 9 rebounds despite brutal offensive efficiency (2-9 FG, 15% usage), pulling down boards at a rate well above her recent L5 average of 4.0—the game stayed competitive enough to generate rebound opportunities despite the low 159.5 total.
IND @ LVA3–0+2.55u
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.