WEEK 8 · Sun, Nov 1, 11:00 AM CST

Atlanta Falcons @ Tampa Bay Buccaneers

8 qualified model plays · 10 modeled lines did not qualify · 5-3-0
← Back to Week 8
MODEL OVERVIEW

What the board is seeing

Qualified plays 8 Published sides that cleared the current model thresholds.
Avg model win 70.5% Average estimated win probability across this game's qualified plays.
Avg no-vig edge +19.4% Model probability minus the market's no-vig implied probability.
Avg model-implied EV +29.5% 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

Drake London

Receptions
WIN
UNDER 6.5
fanduel -138
Projection 4.4
Proj. gap -2.1
Model win 89.0%
No-vig market 54.2%
No-vig edge +34.8%
Model-implied EV +53.5%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 4.4 is 2.1 below the 6.5 line.
Model win probability 89.0% vs 54.2% no-vig market probability creates a +34.8% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 89.0% model win, +34.8% no-vig edge, and +53.5% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 1 reception
#2 MODEL PLAY

Drake London

Receiving yards
WIN
UNDER 79.5
fanduel -113
Projection 66.9
Proj. gap -12.6
Model win 77.5%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +27.5%
Model-implied EV +46.1%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 66.9 is 12.6 below the 79.5 line.
Model win probability 77.5% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +27.5% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 77.5% model win, +27.5% no-vig edge, and +46.1% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 8 receiving yards
#3 MODEL PLAY

Bucky Irving

Rushing yards
LOSS
UNDER 70.5
fanduel -113
Projection 63.4
Proj. gap -7.1
Model win 70.7%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +20.7%
Model-implied EV +33.3%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 63.4 is 7.1 below the 70.5 line.
Model win probability 70.7% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +20.7% edge.
Qualified with 796 residual samples, 70.7% model win, +20.7% no-vig edge, and +33.3% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 796
Final: 170 rushing yards
#4 MODEL PLAY

Chris Godwin Jr.

Receptions
WIN
UNDER 4.5
fanduel -132
Projection 4.1
Proj. gap -0.4
Model win 70.6%
No-vig market 53.2%
No-vig edge +17.3%
Model-implied EV +24.0%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 4.1 is 0.4 below the 4.5 line.
Model win probability 70.6% vs 53.2% no-vig market probability creates a +17.3% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 70.6% model win, +17.3% no-vig edge, and +24.0% 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
#5 MODEL PLAY

Kyle Pitts

Receptions
LOSS
OVER 3.5
fanduel -122
Projection 5.2
Proj. gap +1.7
Model win 66.0%
No-vig market 51.6%
No-vig edge +14.3%
Model-implied EV +20.0%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 5.2 is 1.7 above the 3.5 line.
Model win probability 66.0% vs 51.6% no-vig market probability creates a +14.3% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 66.0% model win, +14.3% no-vig edge, and +20.0% 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
#6 MODEL PLAY

Bijan Robinson

Rushing yards
WIN
UNDER 80.5
fanduel -113
Projection 77.6
Proj. gap -2.9
Model win 66.0%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +16.0%
Model-implied EV +24.3%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 77.6 is 2.9 below the 80.5 line.
Model win probability 66.0% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +16.0% edge.
Qualified with 796 residual samples, 66.0% model win, +16.0% no-vig edge, and +24.3% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 796
Final: 76 rushing yards
#7 MODEL PLAY

Kyle Pitts

Receiving yards
LOSS
OVER 35.5
fanduel -113
Projection 56.9
Proj. gap +21.4
Model win 64.9%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +14.9%
Model-implied EV +22.3%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 56.9 is 21.4 above the 35.5 line.
Model win probability 64.9% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +14.9% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 64.9% model win, +14.9% no-vig edge, and +22.3% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 6 receiving yards
#8 MODEL PLAY

Michael Penix Jr.

Passing yards
WIN
UNDER 229.5
fanduel -113
Projection 211.7
Proj. gap -17.8
Model win 59.7%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +9.7%
Model-implied EV +12.5%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 211.7 is 17.8 below the 229.5 line.
Model win probability 59.7% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +9.7% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 59.7% model win, +9.7% no-vig edge, and +12.5% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 516
Final: 125 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

Baker Mayfield

Passing TDs
Did not qualify
Model side: UNDER 1.5
fanduel -144
Projection1.4
Proj. gap-0.1
Model win56.2%
No-vig market55.3%
No-vig edge+0.9%
Model-implied EV-4.8%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Baker Mayfield

Passing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 215.5
fanduel -113
Projection225.7
Proj. gap+10.2
Model win52.9%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+2.9%
Model-implied EV-0.3%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Bijan Robinson

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 3.5
fanduel -148
Projection4.4
Proj. gap+0.9
Model win50.9%
No-vig market55.9%
No-vig edge-5.0%
Model-implied EV-14.7%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Bijan Robinson

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 31.5
fanduel -113
Projection38.8
Proj. gap+7.3
Model win43.3%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-6.7%
Model-implied EV-18.4%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Cade Otton

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 3.5
fanduel -114
Projection4.3
Proj. gap+0.8
Model win49.3%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-0.7%
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

Cade Otton

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 33.5
fanduel -113
Projection46.7
Proj. gap+13.2
Model win52.3%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+2.3%
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

Chris Godwin Jr.

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 39.5
fanduel -113
Projection48.2
Proj. gap+8.7
Model win45.3%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-4.7%
Model-implied EV-14.7%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Jahan Dotson

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: UNDER 2.5
fanduel -180
Projection2.4
Proj. gap-0.1
Model win64.9%
No-vig market60.1%
No-vig edge+4.8%
Model-implied EV+1.0%
Why it did not qualify: No-vig market edge did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Jahan Dotson

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 25.5
fanduel -113
Projection33.2
Proj. gap+7.7
Model win44.1%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-5.9%
Model-implied EV-17.0%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Michael Penix Jr.

Passing TDs
Did not qualify
Model side: UNDER 1.5
fanduel -188
Projection1.2
Proj. gap-0.3
Model win60.1%
No-vig market61.2%
No-vig edge-1.2%
Model-implied EV-8.0%
Why it did not qualify: No-vig market edge did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
PDR is part of The Buffet. Turn your sports takes into challenges with friends at Buffet Bets →