WEEK 5 · Sun, Oct 11, 12:00 PM CDT

Minnesota Vikings @ New Orleans Saints

6 qualified model plays · 5 modeled lines did not qualify · 5-1-0
← Back to Week 5
MODEL OVERVIEW

What the board is seeing

Qualified plays 6 Published sides that cleared the current model thresholds.
Avg model win 73.5% Average estimated win probability across this game's qualified plays.
Avg no-vig edge +23.1% Model probability minus the market's no-vig implied probability.
Avg model-implied EV +36.8% 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

Aaron Jones

Rushing yards
LOSS
UNDER 72.5
fanduel -114
Projection 52.9
Proj. gap -19.6
Model win 80.0%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +30.0%
Model-implied EV +50.2%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 52.9 is 19.6 below the 72.5 line.
Model win probability 80.0% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +30.0% edge.
Qualified with 796 residual samples, 80.0% model win, +30.0% no-vig edge, and +50.2% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 796
Final: 113 rushing yards
#2 MODEL PLAY

Juwan Johnson

Receptions
WIN
UNDER 4.5
fanduel -136
Projection 3.3
Proj. gap -1.2
Model win 79.2%
No-vig market 53.8%
No-vig edge +25.4%
Model-implied EV +37.4%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 3.3 is 1.2 below the 4.5 line.
Model win probability 79.2% vs 53.8% no-vig market probability creates a +25.4% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 79.2% model win, +25.4% no-vig edge, and +37.4% 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

Chris Olave

Receiving yards
WIN
UNDER 81.5
fanduel -114
Projection 71.7
Proj. gap -9.8
Model win 75.2%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +25.2%
Model-implied EV +41.2%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 71.7 is 9.8 below the 81.5 line.
Model win probability 75.2% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +25.2% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 75.2% model win, +25.2% no-vig edge, and +41.2% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 46 receiving yards
#4 MODEL PLAY

Chris Olave

Receptions
WIN
UNDER 6.5
fanduel -106
Projection 5.9
Proj. gap -0.6
Model win 73.4%
No-vig market 48.4%
No-vig edge +25.0%
Model-implied EV +42.6%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 5.9 is 0.6 below the 6.5 line.
Model win probability 73.4% vs 48.4% no-vig market probability creates a +25.0% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 73.4% model win, +25.0% no-vig edge, and +42.6% 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

Aaron Jones

Receiving yards
WIN
UNDER 18.5
fanduel -114
Projection 17.9
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 17.9 is 0.6 below the 18.5 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: 4 receiving yards
#6 MODEL PLAY

Tyler Shough

Passing yards
WIN
UNDER 237.5
fanduel -114
Projection 205.3
Proj. gap -32.2
Model win 65.7%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +15.7%
Model-implied EV +23.3%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 205.3 is 32.2 below the 237.5 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: 96 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

Aaron Jones

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 2.5
fanduel -174
Projection2.6
Proj. gap+0.1
Model win37.4%
No-vig market59.4%
No-vig edge-22.0%
Model-implied EV-41.1%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Devaughn Vele

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 3.5
fanduel -130
Projection4.0
Proj. gap+0.5
Model win45.1%
No-vig market52.8%
No-vig edge-7.7%
Model-implied EV-20.2%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Devaughn Vele

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 36.5
fanduel -114
Projection44.1
Proj. gap+7.6
Model win43.9%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-6.1%
Model-implied EV-17.6%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Juwan Johnson

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 42.5
fanduel -114
Projection44.6
Proj. gap+2.1
Model win36.2%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-13.8%
Model-implied EV-32.0%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Tyler Shough

Passing TDs
Did not qualify
Model side: UNDER 1.5
fanduel -205
Projection1.0
Proj. gap-0.5
Model win64.5%
No-vig market62.9%
No-vig edge+1.7%
Model-implied EV-4.0%
Why it did not qualify: No-vig market edge did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
PDR is part of The Buffet. Turn your sports takes into challenges with friends at Buffet Bets →