WEEK 6 · Sun, Oct 18, 12:00 PM CDT

New Orleans Saints @ New York Giants

8 qualified model plays · 7 modeled lines did not qualify · 5-3-0
← Back to Week 6
MODEL OVERVIEW

What the board is seeing

Qualified plays 8 Published sides that cleared the current model thresholds.
Avg model win 68.2% Average estimated win probability across this game's qualified plays.
Avg no-vig edge +16.5% Model probability minus the market's no-vig implied probability.
Avg model-implied EV +23.8% 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

Malik Nabers

Receptions
LOSS
UNDER 5.5
fanduel -118
Projection 4.3
Proj. gap -1.2
Model win 79.2%
No-vig market 50.6%
No-vig edge +28.6%
Model-implied EV +46.4%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 4.3 is 1.2 below the 5.5 line.
Model win probability 79.2% vs 50.6% no-vig market probability creates a +28.6% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 79.2% model win, +28.6% no-vig edge, and +46.4% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 12 receptions
#2 MODEL PLAY

Jameis Winston

Passing TDs
WIN
UNDER 1.5
fanduel -154
Projection 0.7
Proj. gap -0.8
Model win 73.4%
No-vig market 56.7%
No-vig edge +16.7%
Model-implied EV +21.1%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 0.7 is 0.8 below the 1.5 line.
Model win probability 73.4% vs 56.7% no-vig market probability creates a +16.7% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 73.4% model win, +16.7% no-vig edge, and +21.1% 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
#3 MODEL PLAY

Malik Nabers

Receiving yards
LOSS
UNDER 68.5
fanduel -114
Projection 64.8
Proj. gap -3.7
Model win 70.2%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +20.2%
Model-implied EV +31.9%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 64.8 is 3.7 below the 68.5 line.
Model win probability 70.2% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +20.2% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 70.2% model win, +20.2% no-vig edge, and +31.9% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 165 receiving yards
#4 MODEL PLAY

Chris Olave

Receptions
WIN
UNDER 6.5
fanduel -114
Projection 6.2
Proj. gap -0.3
Model win 67.9%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +17.9%
Model-implied EV +27.5%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 6.2 is 0.3 below the 6.5 line.
Model win probability 67.9% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +17.9% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 67.9% model win, +17.9% no-vig edge, and +27.5% 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

Devaughn Vele

Receptions
WIN
UNDER 4.5
fanduel -130
Projection 4.4
Proj. gap -0.1
Model win 65.9%
No-vig market 52.8%
No-vig edge +13.1%
Model-implied EV +16.6%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 4.4 is 0.1 below the 4.5 line.
Model win probability 65.9% vs 52.8% no-vig market probability creates a +13.1% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 65.9% model win, +13.1% no-vig edge, and +16.6% 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
#6 MODEL PLAY

Tyler Shough

Passing TDs
LOSS
UNDER 1.5
fanduel -132
Projection 1.0
Proj. gap -0.5
Model win 64.3%
No-vig market 53.2%
No-vig edge +11.1%
Model-implied EV +13.1%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 1.0 is 0.5 below the 1.5 line.
Model win probability 64.3% vs 53.2% no-vig market probability creates a +11.1% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 64.3% model win, +11.1% no-vig edge, and +13.1% 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
#7 MODEL PLAY

Jameis Winston

Passing yards
WIN
UNDER 222.5
fanduel -114
Projection 193.9
Proj. gap -28.6
Model win 63.6%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +13.6%
Model-implied EV +19.3%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 193.9 is 28.6 below the 222.5 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: 152 passing yards
#8 MODEL PLAY

Tyler Shough

Passing yards
WIN
UNDER 238.5
fanduel -114
Projection 216.9
Proj. gap -21.6
Model win 61.0%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +11.0%
Model-implied EV +14.6%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 216.9 is 21.6 below the 238.5 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: 144 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

Cam Skattebo

Rushing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 57.5
fanduel -114
Projection57.9
Proj. gap+0.4
Model win37.6%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-12.4%
Model-implied EV-29.5%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 796
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Cam Skattebo

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 1.5
fanduel -158
Projection2.8
Proj. gap+1.3
Model win58.2%
No-vig market57.2%
No-vig edge+1.0%
Model-implied EV-5.0%
Why it did not qualify: No-vig market edge did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Cam Skattebo

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 12.5
fanduel -114
Projection24.0
Proj. gap+11.5
Model win49.9%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-0.1%
Model-implied EV-6.3%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Chris Olave

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 80.5
fanduel -114
Projection82.5
Proj. gap+2.0
Model win36.2%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-13.8%
Model-implied EV-32.1%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Devaughn Vele

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 43.5
fanduel -114
Projection54.7
Proj. gap+11.2
Model win49.5%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-0.5%
Model-implied EV-7.0%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Juwan Johnson

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 4.5
fanduel +102
Projection4.6
Proj. gap+0.1
Model win37.4%
No-vig market46.2%
No-vig edge-8.8%
Model-implied EV-24.5%
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
Projection58.6
Proj. gap+16.1
Model win57.2%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+7.2%
Model-implied EV+7.4%
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 →