WEEK 5 · Sun, Oct 11, 8:30 AM CDT
Philadelphia Eagles @ Jacksonville Jaguars
7 qualified model plays · 7 modeled lines did not qualify · 3-4-0
MODEL OVERVIEW
What the board is seeing
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.
WIN
OVER 0.5
fanduel -220
Projection
1.7
Proj. gap
+1.2
Model win
81.2%
No-vig market
64.3%
No-vig edge
+16.9%
Model-implied EV
+18.1%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 1.7 is 1.2 above the 0.5 line.
Model win probability 81.2% vs 64.3% no-vig market probability creates a +16.9% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 81.2% model win, +16.9% no-vig edge, and +18.1% 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
LOSS
OVER 24.5
fanduel -114
Projection
53.5
Proj. gap
+29.0
Model win
76.6%
No-vig market
50.0%
No-vig edge
+26.6%
Model-implied EV
+43.9%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 53.5 is 29.0 above the 24.5 line.
Model win probability 76.6% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +26.6% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 76.6% model win, +26.6% no-vig edge, and +43.9% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 0 receiving yards
LOSS
UNDER 35.5
fanduel -114
Projection
34.0
Proj. gap
-1.5
Model win
68.2%
No-vig market
50.0%
No-vig edge
+18.2%
Model-implied EV
+28.1%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 34.0 is 1.5 below the 35.5 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: 68 receiving yards
WIN
OVER 1.5
fanduel -102
Projection
2.2
Proj. gap
+0.7
Model win
66.1%
No-vig market
47.2%
No-vig edge
+18.9%
Model-implied EV
+30.9%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 2.2 is 0.7 above the 1.5 line.
Model win probability 66.1% vs 47.2% no-vig market probability creates a +18.9% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 66.1% model win, +18.9% no-vig edge, and +30.9% 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
LOSS
UNDER 3.5
fanduel -130
Projection
3.4
Proj. gap
-0.1
Model win
64.6%
No-vig market
52.8%
No-vig edge
+11.8%
Model-implied EV
+14.3%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 3.4 is 0.1 below the 3.5 line.
Model win probability 64.6% vs 52.8% no-vig market probability creates a +11.8% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 64.6% model win, +11.8% no-vig edge, and +14.3% 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
WIN
UNDER 26.5
fanduel -114
Projection
25.0
Proj. gap
-1.5
Model win
64.6%
No-vig market
50.0%
No-vig edge
+14.6%
Model-implied EV
+21.2%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 25.0 is 1.5 below the 26.5 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: 2 rushing yards
LOSS
UNDER 4.5
fanduel -102
Projection
4.4
Proj. gap
-0.1
Model win
64.5%
No-vig market
47.2%
No-vig edge
+17.3%
Model-implied EV
+27.7%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 4.4 is 0.1 below the 4.5 line.
Model win probability 64.5% vs 47.2% no-vig market probability creates a +17.3% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 64.5% model win, +17.3% no-vig edge, and +27.7% 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.
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 2.5
fanduel +134
Projection3.5
Proj. gap+1.0
Model win52.5%
No-vig market39.9%
No-vig edge+12.5%
Model-implied EV+22.8%
Why it did not qualify:
Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 3.5
fanduel -138
Projection4.6
Proj. gap+1.1
Model win53.9%
No-vig market54.2%
No-vig edge-0.3%
Model-implied EV-7.0%
Why it did not qualify:
Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 43.5
fanduel -114
Projection53.4
Proj. gap+9.9
Model win47.4%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-2.6%
Model-implied EV-11.1%
Why it did not qualify:
Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Did not qualify
Model side: UNDER 193.5
fanduel -114
Projection190.5
Proj. gap-3.0
Model win51.9%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+1.9%
Model-implied EV-2.5%
Why it did not qualify:
Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 60.5
fanduel -114
Projection76.4
Proj. gap+15.9
Model win57.1%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+7.1%
Model-implied EV+7.1%
Why it did not qualify:
Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Did not qualify
Model side: UNDER 229.5
fanduel -114
Projection225.9
Proj. gap-3.6
Model win52.1%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+2.1%
Model-implied EV-2.1%
Why it did not qualify:
Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 13.5
fanduel -114
Projection23.1
Proj. gap+9.6
Model win47.9%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-2.1%
Model-implied EV-10.1%
Why it did not qualify:
Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 796