StatSharp Logo

More WNBA Games

Left ArrowBy Time Current GamesLeft ArrowBy Game# 

Swipe left to see more →

Sunday, 05/18/2025 6:00 PM (ET) 
 Gm#RecordOpenLatestML1H
 MIN
 Minnesota
61538-15-5.5-5.5-220-3
 LAS
 Los Angeles
6168-32161.5161.5+18082

Matchup Content Menu

Swipe left to see more →

Tip SheetSimulation & Ratings🔒Betting Systems🔒Team Trends🔒Team StatsPlayers Stats & InjuriesSchedule & ResultsHead-to-Head🔒Coaches🔒

WNBA Simulation & Power Ratings

This page features detailed power rating line projections alongside StatSharp's advanced game simulations, each offering precise projected scores and game statistics, estimated fair market lines, positive expected value percentages, and projected hit rates against both the side and total lines. Both sections clearly identify potential betting advantages by highlighting significant value edges when they occur. Use this comprehensive analysis to confidently identify the strongest wagering opportunities available.

Power Rating Projections

Compare team strength with power ratings based on recent results versus expectations. Identify potential advantages where ratings differ from the actual line.

Swipe left to see more →

 Power Rating
TeamsRatingEstimateActualEdge
 MIN Minnesota87-7-5.5MIN (+1.5)
 LAS Los Angeles78 

Game Simulation Results

This table shows projected scores and stats from simulations, including shooting, free throws, and rebounding. Edges highlight potential advantages versus the current line.

Swipe left to see more →

Average projected scores and game statistics.
 Scores, EdgesShooting   3pt ShootingFree ThrowsRebounding 
TeamsScoreEdgeH1ScoreEdge3FGM-APct.3FGM-APct.FTM-APct.Tot.OFFTO
 MIN Minnesota85MIN (+2.5) 42MIN (+1) 32-6747.5%8-2336.2%12-1582.9%43714
 LAS Los Angeles76Un (+0.7)38Un (+1.2)28-6841.3%7-2331.9%13-1777.6%41814

Simulation Line Covers

Swipe left to see more →

The number of simulations in which each team covered the current spread, won the game straight up, and number of simulations which went over or under the current total are listed below. Edges are indicated where one side enjoyed a significant advantage against the line or total.
In 1000 simulated games, Minnesota covered the spread 585 times, while Los Angeles covered the spread 415 times.
Edge against the spread=Minnesota.
In 1000 simulated games, 518 games went under the total, while 482 games went over the total.
No Edge.
In 1000 simulated games, Minnesota won the game straight up 718 times, while Los Angeles won 261 times.
Edge on the money line=Minnesota.
In 1000 simulated games, Minnesota covered the first half line 529 times, while Los Angeles covered the first half line 436 times.
No Edge.
In 1000 simulated games, 529 games went under the first half total, while 433 games went over the first half total.
No Edge.
In 1000 simulated games, Los Angeles covered the 4 point teaser line 540 times, and failed to cover 460 times.
No Edge.
In 1000 simulated games, Minnesota covered the 4 point teaser line 694 times, and failed to cover 306 times.
No Edge.
In 1000 simulated games, 585 games went over the 4 point teaser total, while 415 failed to go over.
No Edge.
In 1000 simulated games, 653 games went under the 4 point teaser total, while 347 failed to go under.
No Edge.

Potential Trends Based On Simulator Projection

Trends Favoring Minnesota.
Bet against Los Angeles in road games when they allow 82 to 87 points in a game.
Los Angeles record since the 2024 season: 0-7 (0%) ATS with an average line of +3.5. (-7.7 unit$, ROI=-100.0%).
The average score of these games was Sparks 73.9, Opponents 84.1.
Bet on Minnesota on the money line when they score 82 to 87 points in a game.
Minnesota record since the 2024 season: 10-2 (83%) with an average money line of -185. (+11.2 unit$, ROI=50.2%)
The average score of these games was Lynx 83.9, Opponents 73.3.
Bet on Minnesota in road games on the money line when their opponents make 29% to 35% of their 3 pointers in a game.
Minnesota record since the 2023 season: 11-2 (85%) with an average money line of +140. (+16.0 unit$, ROI=123.1%)
The average score of these games was Lynx 80.3, Opponents 78.9.
Bet on Minnesota on the money line in games where they force 13 to 18 turnovers.
Minnesota record since the 2024 season: 24-7 (77%) with an average money line of -192. (+19.1 unit$, ROI=32.1%)
The average score of these games was Lynx 82.2, Opponents 74.4.
Bet against Los Angeles on the money line when they make 29% to 35% of their three point attempts in a game.
Los Angeles record since the 2023 season: 4-18 (18%) with an average money line of +168. (-20.0 unit$, ROI=-90.9%)
The average score of these games was Sparks 74.6, Opponents 81.1.
Trends Favoring Over.
Bet over the 1st half total in Minnesota road games when they make 45% to 48% of their shots in a game.
The 1st half Over's record since the 2024 season: 8-0 (100%) with an average 1st half over/under of 82.0. (+8.0 unit$, ROI=90.9%)
The average score of these games was Lynx 44.9, Opponents 44.1.
Glossary of Terms

Teams: The names and logos of the basketball teams being compared in the simulation.

Rating: The power rating assigned to the team, indicating its overall strength based on various factors like performance, statistics, and other metrics.

Score: The average projected final score for each team based on the simulation.

Estimate: The estimated point spread or line based on the power rating comparison between the two teams.

Edge: Indicates a potential betting advantage if the estimated score or line differs significantly from the actual betting line.

H1Score: The average projected score for each team at the end of the first half.

3FGM-A: The average number of three-point field goals made and attempted by the team.

Pct. (3pt Shooting): The average shooting percentage for three-point field goals.

FTM-A: The average number of free throws made and attempted by the team.

Pct. (Free Throws): The average free throw shooting percentage.

Tot. (Rebounding): The average total number of rebounds (both offensive and defensive) secured by the team.

OFF (Rebounding): The average number of offensive rebounds secured by the team.

TO: The average number of turnovers committed by the team.