WEEK 8 · Thu, Oct 29, 7:15 PM CDT

Carolina Panthers @ Green Bay Packers

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

What the board is seeing

Qualified plays 13 Published sides that cleared the current model thresholds.
Avg model win 74.5% Average estimated win probability across this game's qualified plays.
Avg no-vig edge +24.5% Model probability minus the market's no-vig implied probability.
Avg model-implied EV +39.8% 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

Bryce Young

Passing yards
WIN
UNDER 256.5
fanduel -114
Projection 182.0
Proj. gap -74.5
Model win 83.7%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +33.7%
Model-implied EV +57.2%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 182.0 is 74.5 below the 256.5 line.
Model win probability 83.7% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +33.7% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 83.7% model win, +33.7% no-vig edge, and +57.2% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 516
Final: 209 passing yards
#2 MODEL PLAY

Jordan Love

Passing yards
LOSS
UNDER 260.5
fanduel -114
Projection 190.8
Proj. gap -69.7
Model win 81.8%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +31.8%
Model-implied EV +53.5%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 190.8 is 69.7 below the 260.5 line.
Model win probability 81.8% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +31.8% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 81.8% model win, +31.8% 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: 516
Final: 288 passing yards
#3 MODEL PLAY

Tetairoa McMillan

Receptions
LOSS
UNDER 5.5
fanduel -136
Projection 4.1
Proj. gap -1.4
Model win 81.3%
No-vig market 53.8%
No-vig edge +27.5%
Model-implied EV +41.1%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 4.1 is 1.4 below the 5.5 line.
Model win probability 81.3% vs 53.8% no-vig market probability creates a +27.5% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 81.3% model win, +27.5% no-vig edge, and +41.1% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 6 receptions
#4 MODEL PLAY

Christian Watson

Receiving yards
LOSS
UNDER 71.5
fanduel -114
Projection 57.6
Proj. gap -13.9
Model win 78.9%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +28.9%
Model-implied EV +48.1%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 57.6 is 13.9 below the 71.5 line.
Model win probability 78.9% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +28.9% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 78.9% model win, +28.9% no-vig edge, and +48.1% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 113 receiving yards
#5 MODEL PLAY

Tetairoa McMillan

Receiving yards
WIN
UNDER 73.5
fanduel -114
Projection 60.1
Proj. gap -13.4
Model win 78.6%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +28.6%
Model-implied EV +47.6%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 60.1 is 13.4 below the 73.5 line.
Model win probability 78.6% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +28.6% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 78.6% model win, +28.6% no-vig edge, and +47.6% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 58 receiving yards
#6 MODEL PLAY

Chuba Hubbard

Rushing yards
LOSS
UNDER 71.5
fanduel -114
Projection 56.9
Proj. gap -14.6
Model win 76.3%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +26.3%
Model-implied EV +43.1%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 56.9 is 14.6 below the 71.5 line.
Model win probability 76.3% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +26.3% edge.
Qualified with 796 residual samples, 76.3% model win, +26.3% no-vig edge, and +43.1% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 796
Final: 81 rushing yards
#7 MODEL PLAY

John Metchie III

Receptions
WIN
OVER 1.5
fanduel -130
Projection 3.7
Proj. gap +2.2
Model win 76.0%
No-vig market 52.8%
No-vig edge +23.2%
Model-implied EV +34.5%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 3.7 is 2.2 above the 1.5 line.
Model win probability 76.0% vs 52.8% no-vig market probability creates a +23.2% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 76.0% model win, +23.2% no-vig edge, and +34.5% 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
#8 MODEL PLAY

Jalen Coker

Receiving yards
WIN
UNDER 62.5
fanduel -114
Projection 53.5
Proj. gap -9.0
Model win 74.8%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +24.8%
Model-implied EV +40.5%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 53.5 is 9.0 below the 62.5 line.
Model win probability 74.8% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +24.8% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 74.8% model win, +24.8% no-vig edge, and +40.5% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 36 receiving yards
#9 MODEL PLAY

Christian Watson

Receptions
LOSS
UNDER 4.5
fanduel -112
Projection 4.0
Proj. gap -0.5
Model win 71.2%
No-vig market 49.4%
No-vig edge +21.8%
Model-implied EV +34.7%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 4.0 is 0.5 below the 4.5 line.
Model win probability 71.2% vs 49.4% no-vig market probability creates a +21.8% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 71.2% model win, +21.8% no-vig edge, and +34.7% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 8 receptions
#10 MODEL PLAY

Tucker Kraft

Receptions
LOSS
UNDER 4.5
fanduel -122
Projection 4.1
Proj. gap -0.4
Model win 69.6%
No-vig market 51.4%
No-vig edge +18.2%
Model-implied EV +26.6%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 4.1 is 0.4 below the 4.5 line.
Model win probability 69.6% vs 51.4% no-vig market probability creates a +18.2% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 69.6% model win, +18.2% no-vig edge, and +26.6% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 6 receptions
#11 MODEL PLAY

John Metchie III

Receiving yards
LOSS
OVER 15.5
fanduel -114
Projection 39.6
Proj. gap +24.1
Model win 69.5%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +19.5%
Model-implied EV +30.5%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 39.6 is 24.1 above the 15.5 line.
Model win probability 69.5% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +19.5% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 69.5% model win, +19.5% no-vig edge, and +30.5% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 14 receiving yards
#12 MODEL PLAY

Jalen Coker

Receptions
WIN
UNDER 4.5
fanduel +120
Projection 4.2
Proj. gap -0.3
Model win 68.0%
No-vig market 42.5%
No-vig edge +25.5%
Model-implied EV +49.5%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 4.2 is 0.3 below the 4.5 line.
Model win probability 68.0% vs 42.5% no-vig market probability creates a +25.5% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 68.0% model win, +25.5% no-vig edge, and +49.5% 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
#13 MODEL PLAY

Tucker Kraft

Receiving yards
WIN
OVER 43.5
fanduel -114
Projection 60.5
Proj. gap +17.0
Model win 58.5%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +8.5%
Model-implied EV +9.8%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 60.5 is 17.0 above the 43.5 line.
Model win probability 58.5% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +8.5% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 58.5% model win, +8.5% no-vig edge, and +9.8% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 53 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

Bryce Young

Passing TDs
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 1.5
fanduel -108
Projection1.5
Proj. gap+0.0
Model win50.2%
No-vig market48.6%
No-vig edge+1.6%
Model-implied EV-3.3%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Bryce Young

Rushing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 9.5
fanduel -114
Projection18.7
Proj. gap+9.2
Model win47.7%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-2.3%
Model-implied EV-10.4%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 796
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Darren Waller

Receptions
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 2.5
fanduel +116
Projection3.0
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

Darren Waller

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 19.5
fanduel -114
Projection32.4
Proj. gap+12.9
Model win51.8%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge+1.8%
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

Jordan Love

Passing TDs
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 1.5
fanduel -160
Projection1.5
Proj. gap+0.0
Model win50.2%
No-vig market57.5%
No-vig edge-7.3%
Model-implied EV-18.4%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Josh Jacobs

Rushing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 58.5
fanduel -114
Projection65.6
Proj. gap+7.1
Model win44.7%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-5.3%
Model-implied EV-16.0%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 796
PDR is part of The Buffet. Turn your sports takes into challenges with friends at Buffet Bets →