Two-Way Players, One-Way Markets, And The Jontay Porter Effect

Jontay Porter is unlikely to ever take the court for an NBA team again.

Still, this player with a career average of 11.2 minutes per game is a central figure in one of the league’s biggest storylines of the new season.

A number of national sportsbooks such as BetMGM, Caesars, DraftKings, ESPN Bet, and FanDuel won’t be posting NBA player prop unders for those on 10-day or two-way contracts. The rationale is that these players have less financial security than those under contract for the season and could be enticed to purposely tank their performances.

Call this the Jontay Porter effect. 

Porter did exactly this — exiting games early due to supposed injury or illness, ensuring under bets on his props would win — a season ago as a member of the Toronto Raptors. This scheme led him to plead guilty to conspiracy to commit wire fraud, with a resulting lifetime ban from the NBA. 

While NBA props for fringe players may seem inconsequential in terms of the books’ massive handle, their publicly announced move demonstrates an effort to prevent another Porter-like situation.

Certainly any act to increase integrity is going to be applauded by bettors. Still, this new policy raises some concerns — namely the possible removal of additional wagering options by legal sportsbooks. 

To better understand how this move may impact bettors now, and possibly in the future, we talked to a number of handicappers to get their perspective.

Raise the caution flag 

As a senior NBA analyst for VSiN, Jonathan Von Tobel believes the elimination of unders for certain player props shouldn’t go unnoticed. 

“It’s a big deal,” said Von Tobel, who then wondered aloud if this could lead the books to make other changes in the not-too-distant future: “What is stopping a book from expanding this rule to minimum contracts across every sport? Or what about taking every under away on player props in a league like the WNBA, in which the average salary was $150K last season? It is a slippery slope which only hurts the bettors. There are systems in place already to catch this sort of behavior.”

The system to which Von Tobel is referring: In a regulated market, sportsbooks are able to flag suspicious wagers and start an investigation.

The Porter case created a dichotomy of thought in the legalized sports betting era. Some critics said it displayed the problems of gambling infiltrating the leagues, while others highlighted it as a positive that the new system can root out such illegal activity.

Veteran handicapper Bruce Marshall feels this new elimination of some unders stems not only from Porter case but also from the books studying their overall bottom line. 

“I think it is sort of a business decision, so it’s hard for usual sports gaming norms to apply here,” said Marshall, who serves a handicapper for CBS Sportsline and Vegas Insider. ”I would guess they were just getting too much one-way traffic on the unders on these props and that put the books in an always awkward position.”

Regardless of players on the periphery potentially dumping their performances like Porter did, these props are difficult in general for books according to Stephen Byron Keech, who projects NBA props for Unabated.

“Those players can be tougher for sportsbooks to project,” Keech said, “given guys on 10-days usually have limited data sets and/or uncertain roles, which can lead to some value for those that are able to accurately forecast that player’s involvement.”

Original sin 

Professional sports bettor Chris Macero was surprised books even posted player props for those of Porter’s caliber from the start. 

“Outfits like DraftKings or FanDuel are asking for the manipulation of these games and bets by allowing any action on these players,” said the West Coast-based Macero. “Why is there a need to book the point or rebound totals of every single player on the roster? The 12th guy on the bench on a two-way deal needs a player prop?”

Macero added, “I’m honestly shocked it was ever offered, and the limits they allowed to be taken on the Porter kid from Toronto were absurd.”

As stated in court documents, someone with knowledge of Porter’s shenanigans earned over $75,000 in wagers, and another bettor profited $30,000.

When he handicaps NBA player props, Keech studies all possible roles those on the court may play, but he doesn’t necessarily account for contract status. 

“Some guys on 10-days can step into rotation spots immediately and that’s usually from an injury, but others might never get game action. The focus should be all about the situation that individual player is in for that current game and matchup.”

Salary and susceptibility 

Back to the concerns raised by Von Tobel that the books may make a correlation between comparative salaries and what player props are offered — if that did come true, it would certainly create some inconsistencies on the board. 

Porter’s salary last year was $410,000. During this WNBA season, a player such as DiJonai Carrington of the Connecticut Sun, who made $78,469, had two-way props next to her name. 

There’s a similar scenario in the NFL in which many players not working on guaranteed salaries still have two-way props offered along with their superstar teammates. Take Ty Chandler of the Minnesota Vikings, for example. The backup running back’s salary is less than a million dollars, but bettors can play his receiving totals under, just like they can for the $35 million man, Justin Jefferson.   

Looking down the betting menus for other leagues, it isn’t difficult to find under props for the types of players no longer on the NBA board.

The road ahead 

While none of those interviewed felt this news will immediately lead books to only offer overs on all player props, the stain left by Porter and a changing marketplace could make it a possibility in the future. 

“I think the idea of books going just one-way because of this 10-day deal is a little overblown, but it’s not totally out of the question,” said Macero. “I can tell you, though, if it happens it won’t be something I’m going to get involved with, because a one-way market is a huge advantage for the book.”

Keech explained why a pro bettor such as Macero would be turned off by such developments.

“It’s scary to think about the potential trickle-down effects of the Porter mandate for bettors,” Keech said. “One-way markets are a huge advantage to sportsbooks in that it negates their incentive to offer fair pricing and will very likely lead to a spike in the cost of those overs compared to what we’d see with two-way markets. A bet you paid -110 for in a two-way market could quickly become -130 in a one-way with no clear indication to the bettor what sort of vig they’re actually paying.

“It’s hard not to consider that, as consolidation of sports betting operators continues, we’re more likely to see more one-way action in the future and/or reduced limits on two-way prop markets.”

Marshall put these recent developments into a historical perspective.

“It reminds me a bit of when the books decided to take Ivy League football off the boards in the mid-’90s,” said Marshall. “There was never big volume on the Ivies, but the traffic was almost always one-way and it just wasn’t worth it for the books. A couple of obscure books might have kept the Ivies for football, but the collective decision among the big boys was to drop them.”

And if there are continuing adjustments to player props, here is what Marshall expects: 

“If some books take on more one-way or lower two-way player props to miniscule limits, all the bigger corporate books will adopt that same platform. Then there will probably be more independent books willing to take normal action, or at least with limits but not so low.”

Some of those independent books Marshall referenced are offshore — exactly the place the NBA wanted to divert the action away from in a legalized market.