WEEK 7 · Thu, Oct 22, 7:15 PM CDT

New England Patriots @ Chicago Bears

10 qualified model plays · 21 modeled lines did not qualify · 2-8-0
← Back to Week 7
MODEL OVERVIEW

What the board is seeing

Qualified plays 10 Published sides that cleared the current model thresholds.
Avg model win 73.4% Average estimated win probability across this game's qualified plays.
Avg no-vig edge +21.8% Model probability minus the market's no-vig implied probability.
Avg model-implied EV +34.2% 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

TreVeyon Henderson

Rushing yards
LOSS
OVER 24.5
fanduel -113
Projection 72.2
Proj. gap +47.7
Model win 93.3%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +43.3%
Model-implied EV +75.9%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 72.2 is 47.7 above the 24.5 line.
Model win probability 93.3% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +43.3% edge.
Qualified with 796 residual samples, 93.3% model win, +43.3% no-vig edge, and +75.9% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 796
Final: 9 rushing yards
#2 MODEL PLAY

TreVeyon Henderson

Rushing yards
LOSS
OVER 25.5
fanduel -114
Projection 72.2
Proj. gap +46.7
Model win 92.7%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +42.7%
Model-implied EV +74.0%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 72.2 is 46.7 above the 25.5 line.
Model win probability 92.7% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +42.7% edge.
Qualified with 796 residual samples, 92.7% model win, +42.7% no-vig edge, and +74.0% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 796
Final: 9 rushing yards
#3 MODEL PLAY

Rhamondre Stevenson

Rushing yards
LOSS
OVER 41.5
fanduel -113
Projection 71.9
Proj. gap +30.4
Model win 76.1%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +26.1%
Model-implied EV +43.5%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 71.9 is 30.4 above the 41.5 line.
Model win probability 76.1% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +26.1% edge.
Qualified with 796 residual samples, 76.1% model win, +26.1% no-vig edge, and +43.5% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 796
Final: 22 rushing yards
#4 MODEL PLAY

Rhamondre Stevenson

Rushing yards
LOSS
OVER 42.5
fanduel -114
Projection 71.9
Proj. gap +29.4
Model win 75.3%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +25.3%
Model-implied EV +41.3%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 71.9 is 29.4 above the 42.5 line.
Model win probability 75.3% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +25.3% edge.
Qualified with 796 residual samples, 75.3% model win, +25.3% no-vig edge, and +41.3% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 796
Final: 22 rushing yards
#5 MODEL PLAY

A.J. Brown

Receptions
LOSS
OVER 4.5
fanduel -160
Projection 6.3
Proj. gap +1.8
Model win 68.9%
No-vig market 57.5%
No-vig edge +11.4%
Model-implied EV +12.0%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 6.3 is 1.8 above the 4.5 line.
Model win probability 68.9% vs 57.5% no-vig market probability creates a +11.4% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 68.9% model win, +11.4% no-vig edge, and +12.0% 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

Caleb Williams

Passing yards
LOSS
UNDER 245.5
fanduel -114
Projection 210.9
Proj. gap -34.6
Model win 67.2%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +17.2%
Model-implied EV +26.2%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 210.9 is 34.6 below the 245.5 line.
Model win probability 67.2% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +17.2% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 67.2% model win, +17.2% no-vig edge, and +26.2% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 516
Final: 308 passing yards
#7 MODEL PLAY

Drake Maye

Passing TDs
WIN
OVER 1.5
fanduel -125
Projection 2.1
Proj. gap +0.6
Model win 65.9%
No-vig market 51.9%
No-vig edge +14.0%
Model-implied EV +18.6%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 2.1 is 0.6 above the 1.5 line.
Model win probability 65.9% vs 51.9% no-vig market probability creates a +14.0% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 65.9% model win, +14.0% no-vig edge, and +18.6% 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
#8 MODEL PLAY

Caleb Williams

Passing yards
LOSS
UNDER 241.5
fanduel -113
Projection 210.9
Proj. gap -30.6
Model win 64.9%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +14.9%
Model-implied EV +22.4%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 210.9 is 30.6 below the 241.5 line.
Model win probability 64.9% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +14.9% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 64.9% model win, +14.9% no-vig edge, and +22.4% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 516
Final: 308 passing yards
#9 MODEL PLAY

Rome Odunze

Receptions
LOSS
UNDER 3.5
fanduel -154
Projection 3.4
Proj. gap -0.1
Model win 64.8%
No-vig market 56.7%
No-vig edge +8.1%
Model-implied EV +6.9%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 3.4 is 0.1 below the 3.5 line.
Model win probability 64.8% vs 56.7% no-vig market probability creates a +8.1% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 64.8% model win, +8.1% no-vig edge, and +6.9% 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
#10 MODEL PLAY

Drake Maye

Rushing yards
WIN
UNDER 29.5
fanduel -114
Projection 28.0
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 28.0 is 1.5 below the 29.5 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: 26 rushing yards
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Other lines PDR reviewed

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

MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

A.J. Brown

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 70.5
fanduel -113
Projection86.7
Proj. gap+16.2
Model win57.3%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+7.3%
Model-implied EV+8.0%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Caleb Williams

Passing TDs
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 1.5
fanduel -154
Projection1.9
Proj. gap+0.4
Model win59.5%
No-vig market56.7%
No-vig edge+2.8%
Model-implied EV-1.9%
Why it did not qualify: No-vig market edge did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Cole Kmet

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 1.5
fanduel +178
Projection2.1
Proj. gap+0.6
Model win46.8%
No-vig market33.6%
No-vig edge+13.2%
Model-implied EV+30.2%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Cole Kmet

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 8.5
fanduel -114
Projection21.9
Proj. gap+13.4
Model win52.5%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+2.5%
Model-implied EV-1.4%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Colston Loveland

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 3.5
fanduel -172
Projection4.3
Proj. gap+0.8
Model win49.2%
No-vig market59.0%
No-vig edge-9.8%
Model-implied EV-22.2%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Colston Loveland

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 41.5
fanduel -114
Projection48.1
Proj. gap+6.6
Model win41.8%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-8.2%
Model-implied EV-21.5%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

D'Andre Swift

Rushing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 60.5
fanduel -114
Projection70.8
Proj. gap+10.3
Model win48.7%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-1.3%
Model-implied EV-8.5%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 796
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Drake Maye

Passing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 246.5
fanduel -113
Projection262.5
Proj. gap+16.0
Model win55.2%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+5.2%
Model-implied EV+4.1%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Drake Maye

Passing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 248.5
fanduel -114
Projection262.5
Proj. gap+14.0
Model win54.5%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+4.5%
Model-implied EV+2.2%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Drake Maye

Rushing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 27.5
fanduel -113
Projection28.0
Proj. gap+0.5
Model win37.6%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-12.4%
Model-implied EV-29.2%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 796
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Hunter Henry

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 3.5
fanduel +116
Projection4.0
Proj. gap+0.5
Model win45.0%
No-vig market43.3%
No-vig edge+1.7%
Model-implied EV-2.7%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Hunter Henry

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 33.5
fanduel -114
Projection43.1
Proj. gap+9.6
Model win46.9%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-3.1%
Model-implied EV-12.0%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Kalif Raymond

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 2.5
fanduel -114
Projection2.9
Proj. gap+0.4
Model win43.0%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-7.0%
Model-implied EV-19.2%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Kalif Raymond

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 24.5
fanduel -113
Projection39.0
Proj. gap+14.5
Model win54.7%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+4.7%
Model-implied EV+3.1%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Kalif Raymond

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 25.5
fanduel -114
Projection39.0
Proj. gap+13.5
Model win52.6%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+2.6%
Model-implied EV-1.2%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Luther Burden III

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 4.5
fanduel -148
Projection4.6
Proj. gap+0.1
Model win37.8%
No-vig market55.9%
No-vig edge-18.0%
Model-implied EV-36.6%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Luther Burden III

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 56.5
fanduel -114
Projection63.3
Proj. gap+6.8
Model win42.2%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-7.8%
Model-implied EV-20.9%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Rhamondre Stevenson

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 2.5
fanduel -130
Projection2.9
Proj. gap+0.4
Model win43.5%
No-vig market52.8%
No-vig edge-9.3%
Model-implied EV-23.0%
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 18.5
fanduel -114
Projection31.3
Proj. gap+12.8
Model win51.6%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+1.6%
Model-implied EV-3.1%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Rome Odunze

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 44.5
fanduel -113
Projection46.6
Proj. gap+2.1
Model win36.2%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-13.8%
Model-implied EV-31.7%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Rome Odunze

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 45.5
fanduel -114
Projection46.6
Proj. gap+1.1
Model win34.6%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-15.4%
Model-implied EV-35.0%
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 →