WEEK 10 · Sun, Nov 15, 12:00 PM CST

Kansas City Chiefs @ Atlanta Falcons

13 qualified model plays · 9 modeled lines did not qualify · 0 graded - 13 pending
← Back to Week 10
MODEL OVERVIEW

What the board is seeing

Qualified plays 13 Published sides that cleared the current model thresholds.
Avg model win 69.5% Average estimated win probability across this game's qualified plays.
Avg no-vig edge +18.2% Model probability minus the market's no-vig implied probability.
Avg model-implied EV +27.7% Average modeled return using the published side price.

Projection gap is the raw difference between PDR's projection and the sportsbook line. No-vig edge is the probability advantage after removing sportsbook hold. They answer different questions.

How the model works →
QUALIFIED PLAYS

Game prop board

Ranked by the frozen published model board.

#1 MODEL PLAY

Drake London

Receptions
Pending
UNDER 5.5
fanduel -112
Projection 4.0
Proj. gap -1.5
Model win 82.8%
No-vig market 49.4%
No-vig edge +33.4%
Model-implied EV +56.8%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 4.0 is 1.5 below the 5.5 line.
Model win probability 82.8% vs 49.4% no-vig market probability creates a +33.4% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 82.8% model win, +33.4% no-vig edge, and +56.8% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
#2 MODEL PLAY

Kenneth Walker III

Rushing yards
Pending
UNDER 86.5
fanduel -114
Projection 67.9
Proj. gap -18.6
Model win 79.3%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +29.3%
Model-implied EV +48.8%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 67.9 is 18.6 below the 86.5 line.
Model win probability 79.3% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +29.3% edge.
Qualified with 796 residual samples, 79.3% model win, +29.3% no-vig edge, and +48.8% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 796
#3 MODEL PLAY

Drake London

Receiving yards
Pending
UNDER 72.5
fanduel -114
Projection 58.0
Proj. gap -14.5
Model win 79.2%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +29.2%
Model-implied EV +48.8%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 58.0 is 14.5 below the 72.5 line.
Model win probability 79.2% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +29.2% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 79.2% model win, +29.2% no-vig edge, and +48.8% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
#4 MODEL PLAY

Travis Kelce

Receiving yards
Pending
UNDER 49.5
fanduel -114
Projection 42.6
Proj. gap -6.9
Model win 73.2%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +23.2%
Model-implied EV +37.4%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 42.6 is 6.9 below the 49.5 line.
Model win probability 73.2% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +23.2% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 73.2% model win, +23.2% no-vig edge, and +37.4% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
#5 MODEL PLAY

Jahan Dotson

Receptions
Pending
UNDER 2.5
fanduel -210
Projection 2.0
Proj. gap -0.5
Model win 71.6%
No-vig market 63.2%
No-vig edge +8.4%
Model-implied EV +5.7%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 2.0 is 0.5 below the 2.5 line.
Model win probability 71.6% vs 63.2% no-vig market probability creates a +8.4% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 71.6% model win, +8.4% no-vig edge, and +5.7% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
#6 MODEL PLAY

Jahan Dotson

Receiving yards
Pending
UNDER 28.5
fanduel -114
Projection 24.0
Proj. gap -4.5
Model win 70.7%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +20.7%
Model-implied EV +32.7%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 24.0 is 4.5 below the 28.5 line.
Model win probability 70.7% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +20.7% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 70.7% model win, +20.7% no-vig edge, and +32.7% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
#7 MODEL PLAY

Kyle Pitts

Receptions
Pending
OVER 3.5
fanduel -140
Projection 5.4
Proj. gap +1.9
Model win 70.6%
No-vig market 54.6%
No-vig edge +16.0%
Model-implied EV +21.1%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 5.4 is 1.9 above the 3.5 line.
Model win probability 70.6% vs 54.6% no-vig market probability creates a +16.0% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 70.6% model win, +16.0% no-vig edge, and +21.1% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
#8 MODEL PLAY

Travis Kelce

Receptions
Pending
UNDER 4.5
fanduel -160
Projection 4.1
Proj. gap -0.4
Model win 69.9%
No-vig market 57.5%
No-vig edge +12.4%
Model-implied EV +13.6%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 4.1 is 0.4 below the 4.5 line.
Model win probability 69.9% vs 57.5% no-vig market probability creates a +12.4% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 69.9% model win, +12.4% no-vig edge, and +13.6% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
#9 MODEL PLAY

Kenneth Walker III

Receptions
Pending
UNDER 2.5
fanduel +118
Projection 2.4
Proj. gap -0.1
Model win 66.0%
No-vig market 42.8%
No-vig edge +23.2%
Model-implied EV +43.9%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 2.4 is 0.1 below the 2.5 line.
Model win probability 66.0% vs 42.8% no-vig market probability creates a +23.2% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 66.0% model win, +23.2% no-vig edge, and +43.9% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
#10 MODEL PLAY

Kyle Pitts

Receiving yards
Pending
OVER 37.5
fanduel -114
Projection 56.9
Proj. gap +19.4
Model win 62.0%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +12.0%
Model-implied EV +16.3%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 56.9 is 19.4 above the 37.5 line.
Model win probability 62.0% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +12.0% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 62.0% model win, +12.0% no-vig edge, and +16.3% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
#11 MODEL PLAY

Michael Penix Jr.

Passing yards
Pending
UNDER 223.5
fanduel -114
Projection 201.3
Proj. gap -22.2
Model win 61.4%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +11.4%
Model-implied EV +15.3%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 201.3 is 22.2 below the 223.5 line.
Model win probability 61.4% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +11.4% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 61.4% model win, +11.4% no-vig edge, and +15.3% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 516
#12 MODEL PLAY

Patrick Mahomes

Passing TDs
Pending
UNDER 1.5
fanduel -114
Projection 1.2
Proj. gap -0.3
Model win 59.3%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +9.3%
Model-implied EV +11.3%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 1.2 is 0.3 below the 1.5 line.
Model win probability 59.3% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +9.3% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 59.3% model win, +9.3% no-vig edge, and +11.3% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 516
#13 MODEL PLAY

Olamide Zaccheaus

Receiving yards
Pending
OVER 7.5
fanduel -114
Projection 24.2
Proj. gap +16.7
Model win 58.0%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +8.0%
Model-implied EV +8.8%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 24.2 is 16.7 above the 7.5 line.
Model win probability 58.0% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +8.0% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 58.0% model win, +8.0% no-vig edge, and +8.8% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Other lines PDR reviewed

Context only. These are not published recommendations and are not graded.

MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Bijan Robinson

Rushing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 84.5
fanduel -114
Projection88.3
Proj. gap+3.8
Model win41.8%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-8.2%
Model-implied EV-21.5%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 796
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Bijan Robinson

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 4.5
fanduel +130
Projection4.8
Proj. gap+0.3
Model win41.0%
No-vig market40.6%
No-vig edge+0.4%
Model-implied EV-5.7%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Bijan Robinson

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 28.5
fanduel -114
Projection42.2
Proj. gap+13.7
Model win53.2%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+3.2%
Model-implied EV-0.1%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Kenneth Walker III

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 20.5
fanduel -114
Projection23.8
Proj. gap+3.3
Model win37.6%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-12.4%
Model-implied EV-29.5%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Michael Penix Jr.

Passing TDs
Did not qualify
Model side: UNDER 1.5
fanduel -182
Projection1.2
Proj. gap-0.3
Model win59.9%
No-vig market60.4%
No-vig edge-0.5%
Model-implied EV-7.2%
Why it did not qualify: No-vig market edge did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Olamide Zaccheaus

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 1.5
fanduel +134
Projection2.2
Proj. gap+0.7
Model win48.3%
No-vig market39.9%
No-vig edge+8.4%
Model-implied EV+13.0%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Patrick Mahomes

Passing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: UNDER 241.5
fanduel -114
Projection240.2
Proj. gap-1.3
Model win51.4%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+1.4%
Model-implied EV-3.6%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Rashee Rice

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 5.5
fanduel +106
Projection5.7
Proj. gap+0.2
Model win40.1%
No-vig market45.4%
No-vig edge-5.3%
Model-implied EV-17.4%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Rashee Rice

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 56.5
fanduel -114
Projection65.6
Proj. gap+9.1
Model win46.0%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-4.0%
Model-implied EV-13.7%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
PDR is part of The Buffet. Turn your sports takes into challenges with friends at Buffet Bets →