Cubs vs. Brewers Odds, Preview, Prediction: Betting Value on Chicago’s Team Total (Tuesday, June 29)

Carmen Mandato/Getty Images. Pictured: Ian Happ.

Cubs vs. Brewers Odds

Cubs Odds +200
Brewers Odds -235
Over/Under 7.5 (-103 / -120)
Time 8:10 p.m. ET
TV MLB.TV
Odds as of Tuesday morning and via DraftKings.

In an important NL Central divisional matchup this week, the Milwaukee Brewers host the Chicago Cubs.

The Brewers are in first place in the division, while the Cubs are four games behind in second place. Both teams were recently neck-and-neck in the standings, but a gap emerged between the two teams because Milwaukee is in the middle of a six-game winning streak and Chicago has lost its last four games.

As a result of a lopsided pitching matchup between Zach Davies and Brandon Woodruff, the Brewers are heavy favorites for Tuesday night’s game.

Now, two questions remain: Do the Brewers deserve to be -250 favorites against a strong Cubs team, and has the run total has been set too low at only 7.5 runs considering the strength of Chicago’s lineup?

_BookPromo=107

Cubs’ Lineup Has Potential

The Cubs will rely on starting pitcher Zach Davies, who appears much better on paper than he is on the field. After throwing six innings of a no-hitter in his last start against the Dodgers, Davies’ ERA improved. However, Davies gave up five walks and recorded only four strikeouts in that outing.

Davies may have a 4.31 ERA this season, but he also has a 5.32 xFIP and a strikeout rate of only 5.56 strikeouts per nine innings. Additionally, Davies averages 4.65 walks per nine innings, which is two full walks more than in 2020. As a relatively mediocre pitcher on a team with a strong lineup, betting on the Cubs in his starts is a gamble — no pun intended.

Backing up Davies is a Cubs lineup that averages 4.23 runs per game. While the average MLB team scores 4.41 runs per game, Chicago’s talent makes it capable of scoring more runs per game than it does now.

Even though my model projects the Cubs lineup to score 4.27 runs in a neutral ballpark, if Javier Báez, Joc Pederson, and Ian Happ start producing, they are capable of scoring 4.6 runs per game this season. Additionally, Kris Bryant and Anthony Rizzo have put together strong seasons at the plate.

The must-have app for MLB bettors

The best MLB betting scoreboard

Free picks from proven pros

Live win probabilities for your bets

Can Woodruff Contain Cubs?

Opposing Davies and the Cubs is Brewers starter Brandon Woodruff.

Woodruff owns a 6-3 record with a 1.89 ERA after 15 starts this season. Additionally, he’s averaging 6.1 innings per start and has a high strikeout rate.

However, Woodruff also owns a 2.81 xFIP, which, while strong, suggests he’s due for negative regression. With a Milwaukee bullpen that has a 4.03 xFIP, it is not a given it will be able to keep runs off the scoreboard.

Backing up Woodruff is a Brewers lineup that averages 4.22 runs per game. However, according to my model, Milwaukee should average only 4.09 runs per game in a neutral ballpark.

Outside of Omar Narváez, no one has really produced for the Brewers this season offensively. While Kolten Wong, Tyrone Taylor, and Christian Yelich are all having above-average offensive seasons,  Milwaukee’s lineup as a whole is a liability.

Cubs-Brewers Pick

Because Davies is vulnerable, the oddsmakers have gotten the moneyline odds about right for Tuesday. However, there is an opportunity with run total wagers.

The total has been set too low at only 7.5 runs. While my model likes the over at -105, unless the total drops to over seven runs at -125 or better, the team total over on the Cubs is the best way to attack Tuesday’s game.

At only 2.5 runs, the Cubs should go over their team total even against Woodruff and the Brewers. After simulating Tuesday’s game 10,000 times in my model, I found the biggest edge with the Cubs scoring three or more runs.

The Chicago team total over is a good bet, and I would play it up to -135.

Pick: Cubs Team Total Over 2.5 Runs (-120 | Play to -135)

_BookPromo=221

Leave a Reply