WEEK 3 · Sun, Sep 27, 12:00 PM CDT

Los Angeles Chargers @ Buffalo Bills

9 qualified model plays · 9 modeled lines did not qualify · 3-6-0
← Back to Week 3
MODEL OVERVIEW

What the board is seeing

Qualified plays 9 Published sides that cleared the current model thresholds.
Avg model win 70.1% Average estimated win probability across this game's qualified plays.
Avg no-vig edge +19.4% Model probability minus the market's no-vig implied probability.
Avg model-implied EV +30.0% 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

Ladd McConkey

Receiving yards
LOSS
UNDER 54.5
fanduel -114
Projection 36.9
Proj. gap -17.6
Model win 81.5%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +31.5%
Model-implied EV +53.0%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 36.9 is 17.6 below the 54.5 line.
Model win probability 81.5% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +31.5% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 81.5% model win, +31.5% no-vig edge, and +53.0% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 66 receiving yards
#2 MODEL PLAY

Ladd McConkey

Receptions
WIN
UNDER 4.5
fanduel -140
Projection 3.4
Proj. gap -1.1
Model win 78.8%
No-vig market 54.6%
No-vig edge +24.2%
Model-implied EV +35.1%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 3.4 is 1.1 below the 4.5 line.
Model win probability 78.8% vs 54.6% no-vig market probability creates a +24.2% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 78.8% model win, +24.2% no-vig edge, and +35.1% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 4 receptions
#3 MODEL PLAY

Omarion Hampton

Rushing yards
WIN
UNDER 60.5
fanduel -114
Projection 53.3
Proj. gap -7.2
Model win 70.7%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +20.7%
Model-implied EV +32.8%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 53.3 is 7.2 below the 60.5 line.
Model win probability 70.7% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +20.7% edge.
Qualified with 796 residual samples, 70.7% model win, +20.7% no-vig edge, and +32.8% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 796
Final: 56 rushing yards
#4 MODEL PLAY

Tre Harris

Receiving yards
LOSS
UNDER 33.5
fanduel -114
Projection 31.3
Proj. gap -2.2
Model win 69.0%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +19.0%
Model-implied EV +29.5%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 31.3 is 2.2 below the 33.5 line.
Model win probability 69.0% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +19.0% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 69.0% model win, +19.0% no-vig edge, and +29.5% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 76 receiving yards
#5 MODEL PLAY

DJ Moore

Receptions
LOSS
UNDER 3.5
fanduel +106
Projection 3.2
Proj. gap -0.3
Model win 68.6%
No-vig market 45.4%
No-vig edge +23.2%
Model-implied EV +41.4%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 3.2 is 0.3 below the 3.5 line.
Model win probability 68.6% vs 45.4% no-vig market probability creates a +23.2% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 68.6% model win, +23.2% no-vig edge, and +41.4% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 6 receptions
#6 MODEL PLAY

Omarion Hampton

Receptions
LOSS
OVER 1.5
fanduel -148
Projection 3.2
Proj. gap +1.7
Model win 67.3%
No-vig market 55.9%
No-vig edge +11.4%
Model-implied EV +12.7%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 3.2 is 1.7 above the 1.5 line.
Model win probability 67.3% vs 55.9% no-vig market probability creates a +11.4% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 67.3% model win, +11.4% no-vig edge, and +12.7% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 0 receptions
#7 MODEL PLAY

Josh Allen

Passing yards
WIN
UNDER 238.5
fanduel -114
Projection 206.9
Proj. gap -31.6
Model win 65.7%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +15.7%
Model-implied EV +23.3%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 206.9 is 31.6 below the 238.5 line.
Model win probability 65.7% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +15.7% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 65.7% model win, +15.7% no-vig edge, and +23.3% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 516
Final: 204 passing yards
#8 MODEL PLAY

James Cook

Rushing yards
LOSS
UNDER 77.5
fanduel -114
Projection 75.3
Proj. gap -2.2
Model win 65.2%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +15.2%
Model-implied EV +22.4%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 75.3 is 2.2 below the 77.5 line.
Model win probability 65.2% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +15.2% edge.
Qualified with 796 residual samples, 65.2% model win, +15.2% no-vig edge, and +22.4% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 796
Final: 154 rushing yards
#9 MODEL PLAY

Justin Herbert

Passing yards
LOSS
UNDER 222.5
fanduel -114
Projection 192.5
Proj. gap -30.0
Model win 64.0%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +14.0%
Model-implied EV +20.1%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 192.5 is 30.0 below the 222.5 line.
Model win probability 64.0% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +14.0% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 64.0% model win, +14.0% no-vig edge, and +20.1% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 516
Final: 226 passing yards
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Other lines PDR reviewed

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

MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

DJ Moore

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 49.5
fanduel -114
Projection51.7
Proj. gap+2.2
Model win36.3%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-13.7%
Model-implied EV-31.9%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Josh Allen

Passing TDs
Did not qualify
Model side: UNDER 1.5
fanduel +112
Projection1.4
Proj. gap-0.1
Model win56.8%
No-vig market44.1%
No-vig edge+12.6%
Model-implied EV+20.4%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Josh Allen

Rushing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 32.5
fanduel -114
Projection39.7
Proj. gap+7.2
Model win44.8%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-5.2%
Model-implied EV-15.8%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 796
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Justin Herbert

Passing TDs
Did not qualify
Model side: UNDER 1.5
fanduel -182
Projection1.5
Proj. gap-0.0
Model win54.8%
No-vig market60.2%
No-vig edge-5.3%
Model-implied EV-15.0%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Justin Herbert

Rushing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 19.5
fanduel -114
Projection28.8
Proj. gap+9.3
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

Omarion Hampton

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 11.5
fanduel -114
Projection17.0
Proj. gap+5.5
Model win40.7%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-9.3%
Model-implied EV-23.6%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Quentin Johnston

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 3.5
fanduel +132
Projection3.7
Proj. gap+0.2
Model win38.9%
No-vig market40.2%
No-vig edge-1.3%
Model-implied EV-9.7%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Quentin Johnston

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 35.5
fanduel -114
Projection50.2
Proj. gap+14.7
Model win55.1%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+5.1%
Model-implied EV+3.4%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Tre Harris

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 2.5
fanduel -166
Projection2.8
Proj. gap+0.3
Model win42.2%
No-vig market58.3%
No-vig edge-16.1%
Model-implied EV-32.4%
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 →