WEEK 4 · Sun, Oct 4, 12:00 PM CDT

New England Patriots @ Buffalo Bills

9 qualified model plays · 14 modeled lines did not qualify · 7-2-0
← Back to Week 4
MODEL OVERVIEW

What the board is seeing

Qualified plays 9 Published sides that cleared the current model thresholds.
Avg model win 68.9% Average estimated win probability across this game's qualified plays.
Avg no-vig edge +20.6% Model probability minus the market's no-vig implied probability.
Avg model-implied EV +34.2% 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

Josh Allen

Passing yards
LOSS
UNDER 242.5
fanduel -114
Projection 179.4
Proj. gap -63.1
Model win 79.3%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +29.3%
Model-implied EV +48.8%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 179.4 is 63.1 below the 242.5 line.
Model win probability 79.3% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +29.3% edge.
Qualified with 516 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: 516
Final: 253 passing yards
#2 MODEL PLAY

Rhamondre Stevenson

Rushing yards
WIN
OVER 30.5
fanduel -114
Projection 55.9
Proj. gap +25.4
Model win 70.0%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +20.0%
Model-implied EV +31.4%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 55.9 is 25.4 above the 30.5 line.
Model win probability 70.0% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +20.0% edge.
Qualified with 796 residual samples, 70.0% model win, +20.0% no-vig edge, and +31.4% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 796
Final: 47 rushing yards
#3 MODEL PLAY

DJ Moore

Receptions
WIN
UNDER 3.5
fanduel -102
Projection 3.1
Proj. gap -0.4
Model win 69.6%
No-vig market 47.2%
No-vig edge +22.5%
Model-implied EV +37.9%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 3.1 is 0.4 below the 3.5 line.
Model win probability 69.6% vs 47.2% no-vig market probability creates a +22.5% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 69.6% model win, +22.5% no-vig edge, and +37.9% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 1 reception
#4 MODEL PLAY

DJ Moore

Receiving yards
WIN
UNDER 45.5
fanduel -114
Projection 42.8
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 42.8 is 2.7 below the 45.5 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: 11 receiving yards
#5 MODEL PLAY

Keon Coleman

Receiving yards
WIN
OVER 12.5
fanduel -114
Projection 36.6
Proj. gap +24.1
Model win 69.5%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +19.5%
Model-implied EV +30.4%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 36.6 is 24.1 above the 12.5 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 +30.4% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 116 receiving yards
#6 MODEL PLAY

Mack Hollins

Receiving yards
LOSS
UNDER 43.5
fanduel -114
Projection 42.9
Proj. gap -0.6
Model win 67.3%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +17.3%
Model-implied EV +26.4%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 42.9 is 0.6 below the 43.5 line.
Model win probability 67.3% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +17.3% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 67.3% model win, +17.3% no-vig edge, and +26.4% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 53 receiving yards
#7 MODEL PLAY

Drake Maye

Passing TDs
WIN
OVER 1.5
fanduel +134
Projection 2.1
Proj. gap +0.6
Model win 66.1%
No-vig market 39.9%
No-vig edge +26.2%
Model-implied EV +54.6%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 2.1 is 0.6 above the 1.5 line.
Model win probability 66.1% vs 39.9% no-vig market probability creates a +26.2% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 66.1% model win, +26.2% no-vig edge, and +54.6% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 516
Final: 3 passing TDs
#8 MODEL PLAY

James Cook

Rushing yards
WIN
UNDER 87.5
fanduel -114
Projection 86.1
Proj. gap -1.4
Model win 64.6%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +14.6%
Model-implied EV +21.2%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 86.1 is 1.4 below the 87.5 line.
Model win probability 64.6% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +14.6% edge.
Qualified with 796 residual samples, 64.6% model win, +14.6% no-vig edge, and +21.2% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 796
Final: 75 rushing yards
#9 MODEL PLAY

Keon Coleman

Receptions
WIN
OVER 1.5
fanduel -102
Projection 3.1
Proj. gap +1.6
Model win 64.0%
No-vig market 47.2%
No-vig edge +16.8%
Model-implied EV +26.8%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 3.1 is 1.6 above the 1.5 line.
Model win probability 64.0% vs 47.2% no-vig market probability creates a +16.8% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 64.0% model win, +16.8% no-vig edge, and +26.8% 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
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Other lines PDR reviewed

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

MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Drake Maye

Passing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: UNDER 231.5
fanduel -114
Projection220.5
Proj. gap-11.0
Model win56.4%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+6.4%
Model-implied EV+5.9%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Drake Maye

Rushing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 26.5
fanduel -114
Projection27.4
Proj. gap+0.9
Model win37.9%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-12.1%
Model-implied EV-28.8%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 796
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Hunter Henry

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 3.5
fanduel -108
Projection3.6
Proj. gap+0.1
Model win38.0%
No-vig market48.6%
No-vig edge-10.6%
Model-implied EV-26.8%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Hunter Henry

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 31.5
fanduel -114
Projection39.3
Proj. gap+7.8
Model win44.2%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-5.8%
Model-implied EV-17.1%
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 +120
Projection1.4
Proj. gap-0.1
Model win57.2%
No-vig market42.5%
No-vig edge+14.7%
Model-implied EV+25.8%
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 31.5
fanduel -114
Projection39.0
Proj. gap+7.5
Model win45.4%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-4.6%
Model-implied EV-14.9%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 796
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Khalil Shakir

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 3.5
fanduel -148
Projection4.3
Proj. gap+0.8
Model win49.2%
No-vig market55.9%
No-vig edge-6.6%
Model-implied EV-17.5%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Khalil Shakir

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 39.5
fanduel -114
Projection42.9
Proj. gap+3.4
Model win37.6%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-12.4%
Model-implied EV-29.4%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Mack Hollins

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 3.5
fanduel -130
Projection4.2
Proj. gap+0.7
Model win48.2%
No-vig market52.8%
No-vig edge-4.6%
Model-implied EV-14.7%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Rhamondre Stevenson

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 2.5
fanduel -138
Projection2.7
Proj. gap+0.2
Model win39.8%
No-vig market54.2%
No-vig edge-14.4%
Model-implied EV-31.3%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Rhamondre Stevenson

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 18.5
fanduel -114
Projection27.2
Proj. gap+8.7
Model win45.3%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-4.7%
Model-implied EV-15.0%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Romeo Doubs

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 3.5
fanduel +108
Projection3.6
Proj. gap+0.1
Model win37.1%
No-vig market44.9%
No-vig edge-7.8%
Model-implied EV-22.7%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Romeo Doubs

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 39.5
fanduel -114
Projection44.7
Proj. gap+5.2
Model win40.3%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-9.7%
Model-implied EV-24.4%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

TreVeyon Henderson

Rushing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 42.5
fanduel -114
Projection56.2
Proj. gap+13.7
Model win54.1%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+4.1%
Model-implied EV+1.6%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 796
PDR is part of The Buffet. Turn your sports takes into challenges with friends at Buffet Bets →