WEEK 6 · Sun, Oct 18, 12:00 PM CDT

New York Jets @ New England Patriots

6 qualified model plays · 4 modeled lines did not qualify · 5-1-0
← Back to Week 6
MODEL OVERVIEW

What the board is seeing

Qualified plays 6 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 +20.5% Model probability minus the market's no-vig implied probability.
Avg model-implied EV +31.3% 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

Garrett Wilson

Receiving yards
WIN
UNDER 75.5
fanduel -114
Projection 51.2
Proj. gap -24.3
Model win 86.0%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +36.0%
Model-implied EV +61.4%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 51.2 is 24.3 below the 75.5 line.
Model win probability 86.0% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +36.0% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 86.0% model win, +36.0% no-vig edge, and +61.4% 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
#2 MODEL PLAY

Garrett Wilson

Receptions
WIN
UNDER 6.5
fanduel -130
Projection 4.7
Proj. gap -1.8
Model win 85.2%
No-vig market 52.8%
No-vig edge +32.4%
Model-implied EV +50.8%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 4.7 is 1.8 below the 6.5 line.
Model win probability 85.2% vs 52.8% no-vig market probability creates a +32.4% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 85.2% model win, +32.4% no-vig edge, and +50.8% 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

Geno Smith

Passing yards
LOSS
UNDER 221.5
fanduel -114
Projection 174.0
Proj. gap -47.5
Model win 74.2%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +24.2%
Model-implied EV +39.3%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 174.0 is 47.5 below the 221.5 line.
Model win probability 74.2% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +24.2% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 74.2% model win, +24.2% no-vig edge, and +39.3% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 516
Final: 252 passing yards
#4 MODEL PLAY

Drake Maye

Passing TDs
WIN
OVER 1.5
fanduel -158
Projection 2.0
Proj. gap +0.5
Model win 64.3%
No-vig market 57.2%
No-vig edge +7.2%
Model-implied EV +5.1%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 2.0 is 0.5 above the 1.5 line.
Model win probability 64.3% vs 57.2% no-vig market probability creates a +7.2% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 64.3% model win, +7.2% no-vig edge, and +5.1% 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
#5 MODEL PLAY

Rhamondre Stevenson

Rushing yards
WIN
UNDER 70.5
fanduel -114
Projection 69.2
Proj. gap -1.3
Model win 64.3%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +14.3%
Model-implied EV +20.7%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 69.2 is 1.3 below the 70.5 line.
Model win probability 64.3% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +14.3% edge.
Qualified with 796 residual samples, 64.3% model win, +14.3% no-vig edge, and +20.7% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 796
Final: 36 rushing yards
#6 MODEL PLAY

Drake Maye

Passing yards
WIN
OVER 233.5
fanduel -114
Projection 257.5
Proj. gap +24.0
Model win 58.7%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +8.7%
Model-implied EV +10.2%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 257.5 is 24.0 above the 233.5 line.
Model win probability 58.7% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +8.7% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 58.7% model win, +8.7% no-vig edge, and +10.2% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 516
Final: 235 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

Drake Maye

Rushing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 27.5
fanduel -114
Projection28.9
Proj. gap+1.4
Model win39.3%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-10.7%
Model-implied EV-26.2%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 796
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Geno Smith

Passing TDs
Did not qualify
Model side: UNDER 1.5
fanduel -250
Projection1.4
Proj. gap-0.1
Model win56.8%
No-vig market66.8%
No-vig edge-10.0%
Model-implied EV-20.5%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Rhamondre Stevenson

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 2.5
fanduel -158
Projection2.9
Proj. gap+0.4
Model win42.9%
No-vig market57.2%
No-vig edge-14.2%
Model-implied EV-29.9%
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 19.5
fanduel -114
Projection30.8
Proj. gap+11.3
Model win49.7%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-0.3%
Model-implied EV-6.8%
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 →