WEEK 4 · Sun, Oct 4, 3:25 PM CDT

Kansas City Chiefs @ Las Vegas Raiders

11 qualified model plays · 9 modeled lines did not qualify · 3-6-0 - 2 voids
← Back to Week 4
MODEL OVERVIEW

What the board is seeing

Qualified plays 11 Published sides that cleared the current model thresholds.
Avg model win 69.6% Average estimated win probability across this game's qualified plays.
Avg no-vig edge +17.9% Model probability minus the market's no-vig implied probability.
Avg model-implied EV +26.4% 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

Travis Kelce

Receiving yards
WIN
UNDER 47.5
fanduel -114
Projection 29.7
Proj. gap -17.8
Model win 81.6%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +31.6%
Model-implied EV +53.2%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 29.7 is 17.8 below the 47.5 line.
Model win probability 81.6% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +31.6% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 81.6% model win, +31.6% no-vig edge, and +53.2% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 15 receiving yards
#2 MODEL PLAY

Kenneth Walker III

Rushing yards
LOSS
UNDER 86.5
fanduel -114
Projection 63.3
Proj. gap -23.2
Model win 81.3%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +31.3%
Model-implied EV +52.6%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 63.3 is 23.2 below the 86.5 line.
Model win probability 81.3% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +31.3% edge.
Qualified with 796 residual samples, 81.3% model win, +31.3% no-vig edge, and +52.6% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 796
Final: 177 rushing yards
#3 MODEL PLAY

Travis Kelce

Receptions
WIN
UNDER 4.5
fanduel -140
Projection 3.5
Proj. gap -1.0
Model win 77.6%
No-vig market 54.6%
No-vig edge +23.0%
Model-implied EV +33.1%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 3.5 is 1.0 below the 4.5 line.
Model win probability 77.6% vs 54.6% no-vig market probability creates a +23.0% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 77.6% model win, +23.0% no-vig edge, and +33.1% 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

Tre Tucker

Receptions
LOSS
UNDER 3.5
fanduel -158
Projection 3.1
Proj. gap -0.4
Model win 70.4%
No-vig market 57.2%
No-vig edge +13.2%
Model-implied EV +14.9%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 3.1 is 0.4 below the 3.5 line.
Model win probability 70.4% vs 57.2% no-vig market probability creates a +13.2% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 70.4% model win, +13.2% no-vig edge, and +14.9% 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
#5 MODEL PLAY

Rashee Rice

Receptions
VOID
OVER 4.5
fanduel -130
Projection 6.3
Proj. gap +1.8
Model win 69.7%
No-vig market 52.8%
No-vig edge +16.9%
Model-implied EV +23.4%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 6.3 is 1.8 above the 4.5 line.
Model win probability 69.7% vs 52.8% no-vig market probability creates a +16.9% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 69.7% model win, +16.9% no-vig edge, and +23.4% 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

Kirk Cousins

Passing yards
LOSS
UNDER 225.5
fanduel -114
Projection 187.2
Proj. gap -38.3
Model win 69.6%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +19.6%
Model-implied EV +30.6%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 187.2 is 38.3 below the 225.5 line.
Model win probability 69.6% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +19.6% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 69.6% model win, +19.6% no-vig edge, and +30.6% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 516
Final: 365 passing yards
#7 MODEL PLAY

Ashton Jeanty

Receptions
LOSS
UNDER 3.5
fanduel -154
Projection 3.2
Proj. gap -0.3
Model win 69.5%
No-vig market 56.7%
No-vig edge +12.7%
Model-implied EV +14.6%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 3.2 is 0.3 below the 3.5 line.
Model win probability 69.5% vs 56.7% no-vig market probability creates a +12.7% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 69.5% model win, +12.7% no-vig edge, and +14.6% 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
#8 MODEL PLAY

Tre Tucker

Receiving yards
LOSS
UNDER 38.5
fanduel -114
Projection 38.1
Proj. gap -0.4
Model win 67.1%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +17.1%
Model-implied EV +25.9%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 38.1 is 0.4 below the 38.5 line.
Model win probability 67.1% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +17.1% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 67.1% model win, +17.1% no-vig edge, and +25.9% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 44 receiving yards
#9 MODEL PLAY

Patrick Mahomes

Passing yards
WIN
UNDER 236.5
fanduel -114
Projection 215.7
Proj. gap -20.8
Model win 61.0%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +11.0%
Model-implied EV +14.6%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 215.7 is 20.8 below the 236.5 line.
Model win probability 61.0% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +11.0% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 61.0% model win, +11.0% no-vig edge, and +14.6% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 516
Final: 225 passing yards
#10 MODEL PLAY

Patrick Mahomes

Passing TDs
LOSS
UNDER 1.5
fanduel +100
Projection 1.2
Proj. gap -0.3
Model win 59.3%
No-vig market 46.8%
No-vig edge +12.5%
Model-implied EV +18.6%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 1.2 is 0.3 below the 1.5 line.
Model win probability 59.3% vs 46.8% no-vig market probability creates a +12.5% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 59.3% model win, +12.5% no-vig edge, and +18.6% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 516
Final: 2 passing TDs
#11 MODEL PLAY

Rashee Rice

Receiving yards
VOID
OVER 54.5
fanduel -114
Projection 71.3
Proj. gap +16.8
Model win 58.2%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +8.2%
Model-implied EV +9.3%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 71.3 is 16.8 above the 54.5 line.
Model win probability 58.2% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +8.2% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 58.2% model win, +8.2% 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: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Other lines PDR reviewed

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

MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Ashton Jeanty

Rushing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 56.5
fanduel -114
Projection70.8
Proj. gap+14.3
Model win54.6%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+4.6%
Model-implied EV+2.6%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 796
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Ashton Jeanty

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 19.5
fanduel -114
Projection24.4
Proj. gap+4.9
Model win39.8%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-10.2%
Model-implied EV-25.2%
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

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 2.5
fanduel -138
Projection2.8
Proj. gap+0.3
Model win40.4%
No-vig market54.2%
No-vig edge-13.8%
Model-implied EV-30.3%
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 19.5
fanduel -114
Projection22.1
Proj. gap+2.6
Model win36.8%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-13.2%
Model-implied EV-31.0%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Kirk Cousins

Passing TDs
Did not qualify
Model side: UNDER 1.5
fanduel -158
Projection1.3
Proj. gap-0.2
Model win57.9%
No-vig market57.2%
No-vig edge+0.8%
Model-implied EV-5.4%
Why it did not qualify: No-vig market edge did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Michael Mayer

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 2.5
fanduel -118
Projection3.5
Proj. gap+1.0
Model win53.6%
No-vig market50.6%
No-vig edge+3.0%
Model-implied EV-1.0%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Michael Mayer

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 19.5
fanduel -114
Projection35.5
Proj. gap+16.0
Model win57.1%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+7.1%
Model-implied EV+7.3%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Xavier Worthy

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: UNDER 3.5
fanduel -180
Projection3.4
Proj. gap-0.1
Model win65.8%
No-vig market60.1%
No-vig edge+5.8%
Model-implied EV+2.4%
Why it did not qualify: Model-implied EV did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Xavier Worthy

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 33.5
fanduel -114
Projection48.3
Proj. gap+14.8
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
PDR is part of The Buffet. Turn your sports takes into challenges with friends at Buffet Bets →