WEEK 2 · Sun, Sep 20, 12:00 PM CDT

Cleveland Browns @ Tampa Bay Buccaneers

4 qualified model plays · 8 modeled lines did not qualify · 3-1-0
← Back to Week 2
MODEL OVERVIEW

What the board is seeing

Qualified plays 4 Published sides that cleared the current model thresholds.
Avg model win 69.4% Average estimated win probability across this game's qualified plays.
Avg no-vig edge +21.0% Model probability minus the market's no-vig implied probability.
Avg model-implied EV +34.9% 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

Emeka Egbuka

Receiving yards
WIN
UNDER 52.5
fanduel -114
Projection 39.3
Proj. gap -13.2
Model win 78.6%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +28.6%
Model-implied EV +47.5%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 39.3 is 13.2 below the 52.5 line.
Model win probability 78.6% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +28.6% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 78.6% model win, +28.6% no-vig edge, and +47.5% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 16 receiving yards
#2 MODEL PLAY

Quinshon Judkins

Rushing yards
WIN
UNDER 47.5
fanduel -114
Projection 40.8
Proj. gap -6.7
Model win 70.5%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +20.5%
Model-implied EV +32.3%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 40.8 is 6.7 below the 47.5 line.
Model win probability 70.5% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +20.5% edge.
Qualified with 796 residual samples, 70.5% model win, +20.5% no-vig edge, and +32.3% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 796
Final: 21 rushing yards
#3 MODEL PLAY

Emeka Egbuka

Receptions
WIN
UNDER 3.5
fanduel +114
Projection 3.2
Proj. gap -0.3
Model win 69.3%
No-vig market 43.7%
No-vig edge +25.6%
Model-implied EV +48.2%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 3.2 is 0.3 below the 3.5 line.
Model win probability 69.3% vs 43.7% no-vig market probability creates a +25.6% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 69.3% model win, +25.6% no-vig edge, and +48.2% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 3 receptions
#4 MODEL PLAY

Jerry Jeudy

Receiving yards
LOSS
OVER 29.5
fanduel -114
Projection 47.0
Proj. gap +17.5
Model win 59.4%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +9.4%
Model-implied EV +11.6%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 47.0 is 17.5 above the 29.5 line.
Model win probability 59.4% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +9.4% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 59.4% model win, +9.4% no-vig edge, and +11.6% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 0 receiving yards
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Other lines PDR reviewed

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

MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Baker Mayfield

Passing TDs
Did not qualify
Model side: UNDER 1.5
fanduel -110
Projection1.4
Proj. gap-0.1
Model win56.8%
No-vig market49.0%
No-vig edge+7.8%
Model-implied EV+8.4%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Baker Mayfield

Passing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: UNDER 210.5
fanduel -114
Projection201.6
Proj. gap-8.9
Model win56.0%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+6.0%
Model-implied EV+5.1%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Bucky Irving

Rushing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 58.5
fanduel -114
Projection68.2
Proj. gap+9.7
Model win47.9%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-2.1%
Model-implied EV-10.1%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 796
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Cade Otton

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 2.5
fanduel -158
Projection3.6
Proj. gap+1.1
Model win54.2%
No-vig market57.2%
No-vig edge-2.9%
Model-implied EV-11.5%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Cade Otton

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 27.5
fanduel -114
Projection36.0
Proj. gap+8.5
Model win45.2%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-4.8%
Model-implied EV-15.2%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Harold Fannin Jr.

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: UNDER 4.5
fanduel -162
Projection4.4
Proj. gap-0.1
Model win64.8%
No-vig market57.9%
No-vig edge+7.0%
Model-implied EV+4.8%
Why it did not qualify: Model-implied EV did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Harold Fannin Jr.

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 35.5
fanduel -114
Projection46.5
Proj. gap+11.0
Model win49.3%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-0.7%
Model-implied EV-7.5%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Jerry Jeudy

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 2.5
fanduel -114
Projection3.5
Proj. gap+1.0
Model win53.2%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+3.2%
Model-implied EV-0.0%
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 →