WEEK 5 · Sun, Oct 11, 12:00 PM CDT

Indianapolis Colts @ Pittsburgh Steelers

11 qualified model plays · 8 modeled lines did not qualify · 6-5-0
← Back to Week 5
MODEL OVERVIEW

What the board is seeing

Qualified plays 11 Published sides that cleared the current model thresholds.
Avg model win 72.1% Average estimated win probability across this game's qualified plays.
Avg no-vig edge +21.5% Model probability minus the market's no-vig implied probability.
Avg model-implied EV +34.3% 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

Tyler Warren

Receptions
LOSS
UNDER 5.5
fanduel -144
Projection 3.6
Proj. gap -1.9
Model win 87.0%
No-vig market 55.1%
No-vig edge +31.9%
Model-implied EV +47.4%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 3.6 is 1.9 below the 5.5 line.
Model win probability 87.0% vs 55.1% no-vig market probability creates a +31.9% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 87.0% model win, +31.9% no-vig edge, and +47.4% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 7 receptions
#2 MODEL PLAY

Jonathan Taylor

Rushing yards
WIN
UNDER 88.5
fanduel -114
Projection 62.5
Proj. gap -26.0
Model win 83.5%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +33.5%
Model-implied EV +56.8%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 62.5 is 26.0 below the 88.5 line.
Model win probability 83.5% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +33.5% edge.
Qualified with 796 residual samples, 83.5% model win, +33.5% no-vig edge, and +56.8% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 796
Final: 45 rushing yards
#3 MODEL PLAY

Tyler Warren

Receiving yards
LOSS
UNDER 50.5
fanduel -114
Projection 34.0
Proj. gap -16.5
Model win 80.5%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +30.5%
Model-implied EV +51.0%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 34.0 is 16.5 below the 50.5 line.
Model win probability 80.5% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +30.5% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 80.5% model win, +30.5% no-vig edge, and +51.0% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 83 receiving yards
#4 MODEL PLAY

Josh Downs

Receptions
WIN
UNDER 4.5
fanduel +128
Projection 3.9
Proj. gap -0.6
Model win 73.1%
No-vig market 41.0%
No-vig edge +32.2%
Model-implied EV +66.7%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 3.9 is 0.6 below the 4.5 line.
Model win probability 73.1% vs 41.0% no-vig market probability creates a +32.2% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 73.1% model win, +32.2% no-vig edge, and +66.7% 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
#5 MODEL PLAY

Keenan Allen

Receptions
WIN
OVER 2.5
fanduel -192
Projection 4.4
Proj. gap +1.9
Model win 71.9%
No-vig market 61.4%
No-vig edge +10.5%
Model-implied EV +9.4%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 4.4 is 1.9 above the 2.5 line.
Model win probability 71.9% vs 61.4% no-vig market probability creates a +10.5% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 71.9% model win, +10.5% no-vig edge, and +9.4% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 5 receptions
#6 MODEL PLAY

Josh Downs

Receiving yards
WIN
UNDER 58.5
fanduel -114
Projection 54.5
Proj. gap -4.0
Model win 70.5%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +20.5%
Model-implied EV +32.4%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 54.5 is 4.0 below the 58.5 line.
Model win probability 70.5% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +20.5% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 70.5% model win, +20.5% no-vig edge, and +32.4% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 47 receiving yards
#7 MODEL PLAY

Keenan Allen

Receiving yards
WIN
OVER 27.5
fanduel -114
Projection 50.8
Proj. gap +23.3
Model win 68.2%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +18.2%
Model-implied EV +28.1%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 50.8 is 23.3 above the 27.5 line.
Model win probability 68.2% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +18.2% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 68.2% model win, +18.2% no-vig edge, and +28.1% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 45 receiving yards
#8 MODEL PLAY

Pat Freiermuth

Receiving yards
WIN
OVER 27.5
fanduel -114
Projection 50.8
Proj. gap +23.3
Model win 68.2%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +18.2%
Model-implied EV +28.1%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 50.8 is 23.3 above the 27.5 line.
Model win probability 68.2% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +18.2% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 68.2% model win, +18.2% no-vig edge, and +28.1% 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

Darnell Washington

Receiving yards
LOSS
OVER 22.5
fanduel -114
Projection 43.3
Proj. gap +20.8
Model win 63.6%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +13.6%
Model-implied EV +19.5%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 43.3 is 20.8 above the 22.5 line.
Model win probability 63.6% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +13.6% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 63.6% model win, +13.6% no-vig edge, and +19.5% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 12 receiving yards
#10 MODEL PLAY

Aaron Rodgers

Passing TDs
LOSS
UNDER 1.5
fanduel -114
Projection 1.1
Proj. gap -0.4
Model win 63.6%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +13.6%
Model-implied EV +19.3%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 1.1 is 0.4 below the 1.5 line.
Model win probability 63.6% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +13.6% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 63.6% model win, +13.6% no-vig edge, and +19.3% 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
#11 MODEL PLAY

DK Metcalf

Receiving yards
LOSS
OVER 51.5
fanduel -114
Projection 71.9
Proj. gap +20.4
Model win 63.3%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +13.3%
Model-implied EV +18.8%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 71.9 is 20.4 above the 51.5 line.
Model win probability 63.3% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +13.3% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 63.3% model win, +13.3% no-vig edge, and +18.8% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 12 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

Aaron Rodgers

Passing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 222.5
fanduel -114
Projection238.8
Proj. gap+16.3
Model win55.2%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+5.2%
Model-implied EV+3.7%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

DK Metcalf

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 3.5
fanduel -180
Projection4.9
Proj. gap+1.4
Model win59.8%
No-vig market60.1%
No-vig edge-0.3%
Model-implied EV-7.0%
Why it did not qualify: No-vig market edge did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Daniel Jones

Passing TDs
Did not qualify
Model side: UNDER 1.5
fanduel -215
Projection1.3
Proj. gap-0.2
Model win57.9%
No-vig market63.8%
No-vig edge-5.8%
Model-implied EV-15.1%
Why it did not qualify: No-vig market edge did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Daniel Jones

Passing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 213.5
fanduel -114
Projection220.8
Proj. gap+7.3
Model win52.5%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+2.5%
Model-implied EV-1.4%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Darnell Washington

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 2.5
fanduel +124
Projection3.1
Proj. gap+0.6
Model win46.6%
No-vig market41.7%
No-vig edge+4.9%
Model-implied EV+4.3%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Jonathan Taylor

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 2.5
fanduel -110
Projection3.1
Proj. gap+0.6
Model win46.9%
No-vig market49.0%
No-vig edge-2.1%
Model-implied EV-10.4%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Jonathan Taylor

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 15.5
fanduel -114
Projection20.9
Proj. gap+5.4
Model win40.5%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-9.5%
Model-implied EV-24.0%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Pat Freiermuth

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 3.5
fanduel +116
Projection3.5
Proj. gap+0.0
Model win36.7%
No-vig market43.3%
No-vig edge-6.6%
Model-implied EV-20.8%
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 →