WEEK 4 · Sun, Oct 4, 12:00 PM CDT

Dallas Cowboys @ Houston Texans

10 qualified model plays · 5 modeled lines did not qualify · 5-5-0
← Back to Week 4
MODEL OVERVIEW

What the board is seeing

Qualified plays 10 Published sides that cleared the current model thresholds.
Avg model win 68.3% Average estimated win probability across this game's qualified plays.
Avg no-vig edge +20.0% Model probability minus the market's no-vig implied probability.
Avg model-implied EV +32.9% 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

Woody Marks

Rushing yards
LOSS
OVER 33.5
fanduel -114
Projection 66.0
Proj. gap +32.5
Model win 78.9%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +28.9%
Model-implied EV +48.1%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 66.0 is 32.5 above the 33.5 line.
Model win probability 78.9% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +28.9% edge.
Qualified with 796 residual samples, 78.9% model win, +28.9% no-vig edge, and +48.1% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 796
Final: 22 rushing yards
#2 MODEL PLAY

CeeDee Lamb

Receptions
LOSS
UNDER 5.5
fanduel -102
Projection 4.8
Proj. gap -0.7
Model win 74.0%
No-vig market 47.2%
No-vig edge +26.8%
Model-implied EV +46.6%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 4.8 is 0.7 below the 5.5 line.
Model win probability 74.0% vs 47.2% no-vig market probability creates a +26.8% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 74.0% model win, +26.8% no-vig edge, and +46.6% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 17 receptions
#3 MODEL PLAY

Dalton Schultz

Receptions
WIN
UNDER 4.5
fanduel +122
Projection 4.0
Proj. gap -0.5
Model win 72.2%
No-vig market 42.1%
No-vig edge +30.0%
Model-implied EV +60.3%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 4.0 is 0.5 below the 4.5 line.
Model win probability 72.2% vs 42.1% no-vig market probability creates a +30.0% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 72.2% model win, +30.0% no-vig edge, and +60.3% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 2 receptions
#4 MODEL PLAY

Dalton Schultz

Receiving yards
WIN
UNDER 46.5
fanduel -114
Projection 40.8
Proj. gap -5.7
Model win 72.1%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +22.1%
Model-implied EV +35.3%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 40.8 is 5.7 below the 46.5 line.
Model win probability 72.1% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +22.1% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 72.1% model win, +22.1% no-vig edge, and +35.3% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 9 receiving yards
#5 MODEL PLAY

Ryan Flournoy

Receiving yards
WIN
OVER 35.5
fanduel -114
Projection 59.9
Proj. gap +24.4
Model win 70.2%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +20.2%
Model-implied EV +31.9%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 59.9 is 24.4 above the 35.5 line.
Model win probability 70.2% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +20.2% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 70.2% model win, +20.2% no-vig edge, and +31.9% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 37 receiving yards
#6 MODEL PLAY

CeeDee Lamb

Receiving yards
LOSS
UNDER 76.5
fanduel -114
Projection 73.8
Proj. gap -2.7
Model win 69.5%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +19.5%
Model-implied EV +30.5%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 73.8 is 2.7 below the 76.5 line.
Model win probability 69.5% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +19.5% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 69.5% model win, +19.5% no-vig edge, and +30.5% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 189 receiving yards
#7 MODEL PLAY

George Pickens

Receptions
WIN
UNDER 4.5
fanduel +108
Projection 4.5
Proj. gap -0.0
Model win 64.2%
No-vig market 44.9%
No-vig edge +19.3%
Model-implied EV +33.5%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 4.5 is 0.0 below the 4.5 line.
Model win probability 64.2% vs 44.9% no-vig market probability creates a +19.3% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 64.2% model win, +19.3% no-vig edge, and +33.5% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 2 receptions
#8 MODEL PLAY

Dak Prescott

Passing yards
LOSS
UNDER 273.5
fanduel -114
Projection 249.9
Proj. gap -23.6
Model win 62.2%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +12.2%
Model-implied EV +16.8%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 249.9 is 23.6 below the 273.5 line.
Model win probability 62.2% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +12.2% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 62.2% model win, +12.2% no-vig edge, and +16.8% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 516
Final: 335 passing yards
#9 MODEL PLAY

C.J. Stroud

Passing yards
LOSS
UNDER 244.5
fanduel -114
Projection 220.7
Proj. gap -23.8
Model win 62.2%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +12.2%
Model-implied EV +16.8%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 220.7 is 23.8 below the 244.5 line.
Model win probability 62.2% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +12.2% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 62.2% model win, +12.2% no-vig edge, and +16.8% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 516
Final: 347 passing yards
#10 MODEL PLAY

Dak Prescott

Passing TDs
WIN
UNDER 1.5
fanduel -112
Projection 1.3
Proj. gap -0.2
Model win 57.8%
No-vig market 49.4%
No-vig edge +8.4%
Model-implied EV +9.3%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 1.3 is 0.2 below the 1.5 line.
Model win probability 57.8% vs 49.4% no-vig market probability creates a +8.4% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 57.8% model win, +8.4% no-vig edge, and +9.3% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 516
Final: 1 passing TD
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Other lines PDR reviewed

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

MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

C.J. Stroud

Passing TDs
Did not qualify
Model side: UNDER 1.5
fanduel -132
Projection1.5
Proj. gap-0.0
Model win54.8%
No-vig market53.2%
No-vig edge+1.6%
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

David Montgomery

Rushing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 51.5
fanduel -114
Projection54.8
Proj. gap+3.3
Model win41.3%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-8.7%
Model-implied EV-22.4%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 796
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

George Pickens

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 68.5
fanduel -114
Projection76.3
Proj. gap+7.8
Model win44.1%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-5.9%
Model-implied EV-17.2%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Javonte Williams

Rushing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 60.5
fanduel -114
Projection63.7
Proj. gap+3.2
Model win41.2%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-8.8%
Model-implied EV-22.6%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 796
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Ryan Flournoy

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 3.5
fanduel -114
Projection4.0
Proj. gap+0.5
Model win45.7%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-4.3%
Model-implied EV-14.2%
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 →