WEEK 7 · Sun, Oct 25, 3:05 PM CDT

Denver Broncos @ Arizona Cardinals

11 qualified model plays · 9 modeled lines did not qualify · 5-6-0
← Back to Week 7
MODEL OVERVIEW

What the board is seeing

Qualified plays 11 Published sides that cleared the current model thresholds.
Avg model win 72.4% Average estimated win probability across this game's qualified plays.
Avg no-vig edge +22.6% Model probability minus the market's no-vig implied probability.
Avg model-implied EV +36.3% 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

Troy Franklin

Receptions
LOSS
OVER 1.5
fanduel -138
Projection 4.4
Proj. gap +2.9
Model win 87.2%
No-vig market 54.2%
No-vig edge +33.0%
Model-implied EV +50.4%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 4.4 is 2.9 above the 1.5 line.
Model win probability 87.2% vs 54.2% no-vig market probability creates a +33.0% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 87.2% model win, +33.0% no-vig edge, and +50.4% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 0 receptions
#2 MODEL PLAY

Trey McBride

Receptions
LOSS
UNDER 7.5
fanduel -140
Projection 6.4
Proj. gap -1.1
Model win 78.9%
No-vig market 54.6%
No-vig edge +24.3%
Model-implied EV +35.3%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 6.4 is 1.1 below the 7.5 line.
Model win probability 78.9% vs 54.6% no-vig market probability creates a +24.3% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 78.9% model win, +24.3% no-vig edge, and +35.3% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 10 receptions
#3 MODEL PLAY

Marvin Mims Jr.

Receptions
WIN
OVER 1.5
fanduel -122
Projection 3.8
Proj. gap +2.3
Model win 78.2%
No-vig market 51.6%
No-vig edge +26.6%
Model-implied EV +42.3%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 3.8 is 2.3 above the 1.5 line.
Model win probability 78.2% vs 51.6% no-vig market probability creates a +26.6% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 78.2% model win, +26.6% no-vig edge, and +42.3% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 2 receptions
#4 MODEL PLAY

Jaylen Waddle

Receiving yards
WIN
UNDER 54.5
fanduel -114
Projection 46.0
Proj. gap -8.5
Model win 74.4%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +24.4%
Model-implied EV +39.7%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 46.0 is 8.5 below the 54.5 line.
Model win probability 74.4% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +24.4% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 74.4% model win, +24.4% no-vig edge, and +39.7% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 48 receiving yards
#5 MODEL PLAY

Trey McBride

Receiving yards
LOSS
UNDER 65.5
fanduel -114
Projection 58.0
Proj. gap -7.5
Model win 73.6%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +23.6%
Model-implied EV +38.1%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 58.0 is 7.5 below the 65.5 line.
Model win probability 73.6% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +23.6% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 73.6% model win, +23.6% no-vig edge, and +38.1% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 111 receiving yards
#6 MODEL PLAY

Michael Wilson

Receiving yards
WIN
OVER 47.5
fanduel -114
Projection 73.7
Proj. gap +26.2
Model win 72.7%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +22.7%
Model-implied EV +36.6%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 73.7 is 26.2 above the 47.5 line.
Model win probability 72.7% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +22.7% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 72.7% model win, +22.7% no-vig edge, and +36.6% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 55 receiving yards
#7 MODEL PLAY

Troy Franklin

Receiving yards
LOSS
OVER 17.5
fanduel -114
Projection 41.5
Proj. gap +24.0
Model win 69.4%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +19.4%
Model-implied EV +30.2%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 41.5 is 24.0 above the 17.5 line.
Model win probability 69.4% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +19.4% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 69.4% model win, +19.4% no-vig edge, and +30.2% 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
#8 MODEL PLAY

Jaylen Waddle

Receptions
WIN
UNDER 4.5
fanduel +112
Projection 4.2
Proj. gap -0.3
Model win 68.4%
No-vig market 44.1%
No-vig edge +24.2%
Model-implied EV +45.0%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 4.2 is 0.3 below the 4.5 line.
Model win probability 68.4% vs 44.1% no-vig market probability creates a +24.2% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 68.4% model win, +24.2% no-vig edge, and +45.0% 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
#9 MODEL PLAY

J.K. Dobbins

Rushing yards
LOSS
OVER 58.5
fanduel -114
Projection 80.3
Proj. gap +21.8
Model win 65.1%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +15.1%
Model-implied EV +22.2%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 80.3 is 21.8 above the 58.5 line.
Model win probability 65.1% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +15.1% edge.
Qualified with 796 residual samples, 65.1% model win, +15.1% no-vig edge, and +22.2% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 796
Final: 23 rushing yards
#10 MODEL PLAY

Courtland Sutton

Receptions
LOSS
OVER 3.5
fanduel +116
Projection 5.1
Proj. gap +1.6
Model win 64.9%
No-vig market 43.3%
No-vig edge +21.6%
Model-implied EV +40.1%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 5.1 is 1.6 above the 3.5 line.
Model win probability 64.9% vs 43.3% no-vig market probability creates a +21.6% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 64.9% model win, +21.6% no-vig edge, and +40.1% 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
#11 MODEL PLAY

Courtland Sutton

Receiving yards
WIN
OVER 35.5
fanduel -114
Projection 56.4
Proj. gap +20.9
Model win 63.9%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +13.9%
Model-implied EV +19.9%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 56.4 is 20.9 above the 35.5 line.
Model win probability 63.9% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +13.9% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 63.9% model win, +13.9% no-vig edge, and +19.9% 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
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Other lines PDR reviewed

Context only. These are not published recommendations and are not graded.

MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Bo Nix

Passing TDs
Did not qualify
Model side: UNDER 1.5
fanduel -144
Projection1.2
Proj. gap-0.3
Model win60.1%
No-vig market55.1%
No-vig edge+5.0%
Model-implied EV+1.8%
Why it did not qualify: No-vig market edge did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Bo Nix

Passing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 221.5
fanduel -114
Projection239.5
Proj. gap+18.0
Model win56.0%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+6.0%
Model-implied EV+5.1%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Bo Nix

Rushing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 12.5
fanduel -114
Projection26.6
Proj. gap+14.1
Model win54.6%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+4.6%
Model-implied EV+2.6%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 796
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Elijah Higgins

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 2.5
fanduel +134
Projection2.9
Proj. gap+0.4
Model win42.8%
No-vig market39.9%
No-vig edge+2.8%
Model-implied EV+0.1%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Elijah Higgins

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 17.5
fanduel -114
Projection27.5
Proj. gap+10.0
Model win47.6%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-2.4%
Model-implied EV-10.7%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Evan Engram

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 2.5
fanduel -130
Projection3.3
Proj. gap+0.8
Model win50.0%
No-vig market52.8%
No-vig edge-2.8%
Model-implied EV-11.5%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Evan Engram

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 23.5
fanduel -114
Projection38.9
Proj. gap+15.4
Model win56.5%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+6.5%
Model-implied EV+6.0%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Marvin Mims Jr.

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 12.5
fanduel -114
Projection28.6
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
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Michael Wilson

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 4.5
fanduel +116
Projection5.1
Proj. gap+0.6
Model win46.6%
No-vig market43.3%
No-vig edge+3.3%
Model-implied EV+0.6%
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 →