| Player ⇅ | Pos ⇅ | Matchup ⇅ | Dep ⇅ | Proj ⇅ | p10–p90 ⇅ | Car ⇅ | TD% ⇅ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quinshon Judkins CLE @ NO | RB | CLE vs NO | 1 | 66.0 | 32–107 | 16.3 | 49% |
| Woody Marks HOU @ LAC | RB | HOU vs LAC | 2 | 50.9 | 17–91 | 13.3 | 35% |
| Omarion Hampton LAC vs HOU | RB | LAC vs HOU | 1 | 43.5 | 15–79 | 11.4 | 20% |
| David Montgomery CHART HOU @ LAC | RB | HOU vs LAC | 1 | 40.3 | 14–72 | 9.1 | 29% |
| Kendre Miller NO vs CLE | RB | NO vs CLE | 2 | 38.6 | 12–69 | 10.2 | 17% |
| Jawhar Jordan HOU @ LAC | RB | HOU vs LAC | 30.7 | 7–62 | 6.5 | 9% | |
| Audric Estimé CLE @ NO | RB | CLE vs NO | 4 | 30.4 | 10–55 | 6.8 | 15% |
| Dylan Sampson CLE @ NO | RB | CLE vs NO | 2 | 29.3 | 8–55 | 7.2 | 11% |
| Kimani Vidal LAC vs HOU | RB | LAC vs HOU | 3 | 29.0 | 4–62 | 7.5 | 25% |
| Justin Herbert LAC vs HOU | QB | LAC vs HOU | 1 | 26.3 | 5–54 | 4.5 | 34% |
| Alvin Kamara CHART NO vs CLE | RB | NO vs CLE | 1 | 25.6 | 6–49 | 6.6 | 24% |
| Deshaun Watson CLE @ NO | QB | CLE vs NO | 1 | 24.9 | 4–50 | 4.1 | 17% |
| Jaleel McLaughlin CLE @ NO | RB | CLE vs NO | 3 | 19.6 | 0–46 | 3.7 | 19% |
| Keaton Mitchell LAC vs HOU | RB | LAC vs HOU | 2 | 19.5 | 0–48 | 4.0 | 9% |
| Tyler Shough NO vs CLE | QB | NO vs CLE | 1 | 16.5 | 0–40 | 3.0 | 21% |
| CJ Donaldson NO vs CLE | RB | NO vs CLE | 3 | 16.5 | 1–36 | 3.8 | 8% |
| Taylen Green CLE @ NO | QB | CLE vs NO | 4 | 15.9 | 0–36 | 2.6 | 13% |
| C.J. Stroud CHART HOU @ LAC | QB | HOU vs LAC | 1 | 14.0 | 0–32 | 2.5 | 10% |
| DJ Uiagalelei LAC vs HOU | QB | LAC vs HOU | 2 | 12.8 | 0–30 | 2.5 | 15% |
| KC Concepcion CLE @ NO | WR | CLE vs NO | 2 | 11.2 | 0–32 | 1.9 | 11% |
| Dillon Gabriel CLE @ NO | QB | CLE vs NO | 3 | 9.0 | 0–24 | 1.4 | 7% |
| Davis Mills HOU @ LAC | QB | HOU vs LAC | 2 | 8.8 | 0–23 | 1.5 | 8% |
| Shedeur Sanders CLE @ NO | QB | CLE vs NO | 2 | 8.5 | 0–23 | 1.2 | 6% |
| Spencer Rattler NO vs CLE | QB | NO vs CLE | 2 | 8.4 | 0–23 | 1.3 | 7% |
| Zach Wilson NO vs CLE | QB | NO vs CLE | 3 | 7.1 | 0–20 | 1.2 | 10% |
| Tank Dell HOU @ LAC | WR | HOU vs LAC | 5 | 5.6 | 0–19 | 1.0 | |
| Dare Ogunbowale HOU @ LAC | RB | HOU vs LAC | 3 | 4.0 | 0–11 | 1.0 | |
| Xavier Hutchinson HOU @ LAC | WR | HOU vs LAC | 3 | 3.3 | 0–13 | 0.6 | 8% |
| Scott Matlock LAC vs HOU | RB | LAC vs HOU | 3.1 | 0–9 | 0.8 | ||
| Cade Stover HOU @ LAC | TE | HOU vs LAC | 3 | 2.4 | 0–6 | 0.7 | 13% |
| Jaylin Noel HOU @ LAC | WR | HOU vs LAC | 4 | 2.3 | 0–9 | 0.4 | 18% |
| Barion Brown NO vs CLE | WR | NO vs CLE | 4 | 1.9 | 0–7 | 0.4 | 6% |
| Quentin Johnston LAC vs HOU | WR | LAC vs HOU | 2 | 1.9 | 0–8 | 0.4 | 15% |
| Nico Collins HOU @ LAC | WR | HOU vs LAC | 1 | 1.8 | 0–7 | 0.3 | 27% |
| Derius Davis LAC vs HOU | WR | LAC vs HOU | 7 | 1.6 | 0–6 | 0.3 | |
| Malachi Corley CLE @ NO | WR | CLE vs NO | 6 | 1.1 | 0–3 | 0.2 | |
| Michael Burton CLE @ NO | FB | CLE vs NO | 1 | 1.1 | 0–3 | 0.3 | |
| Isaiah Bond CLE @ NO | WR | CLE vs NO | 4 | 0.3 | 0–0 | 0.0 | |
| Harold Fannin Jr. CLE @ NO | TE | CLE vs NO | 1 | 0.2 | 0–0 | 0.1 | 16% |
| Oronde Gadsden II LAC vs HOU | TE | LAC vs HOU | 2 | 0.2 | 0–0 | 0.1 | 27% |
| Tre Harris LAC vs HOU | WR | LAC vs HOU | 3 | 0.1 | 0–0 | 0.0 | 10% |
| Chris Olave NO vs CLE | WR | NO vs CLE | 1 | 0.1 | 0–0 | 0.0 | 28% |
| Jerry Jeudy CLE @ NO | WR | CLE vs NO | 3 | 0.0 | 0–0 | 0.0 | 8% |
No market lines on this page, by construction. The saved line file carries no week, so pricing next week's projections against it would attach this week's numbers to them. Nothing here is a bet signal — it is where the model expects the workload to be before the market has an opinion.
No game line yet for ARI, ATL, BAL, BUF, CAR, CHI, CIN, CLE, DAL, DEN, DET, GB, HOU, IND, JAX, KC, LA, LAC, LV, MIA, MIN, NE, NO, NYG, NYJ, PHI, SEA, SF, TB, WAS — the schedule carries no spread or total for those games, so their touchdown numbers are levelled to an average game environment (22.63 implied points) rather than to their own. Volume and yardage are unaffected; treat the TD% column for those teams as a placeholder.
Injury reports for this week are not published yet, so every projection here assumes availability. Why that matters
Projections only, not advice. How this works →