Live board
Today's Read
Scored 7 TDs on 16 red-zone opportunities — opportunity implies only about 4.3. Touchdown rates that far above expectation rarely repeat, and the market is paying for them.
Model rank
Market
—
Confidence
high
TE · LV · Bye 13
Elite Profile
Calibrated public rating
Projection
8.8
Half-PPR / game
Market ADP
20.7
Consensus overall
FFT fair value
21.7
Calibrated pick
Draft delta
-1.0
Market minus FFT
Draft recommendation
Fairly priced
Risk / reliability
Medium Risk
Reliability
46 / 99
Coverage
80%
Live board
Scored 7 TDs on 16 red-zone opportunities — opportunity implies only about 4.3. Touchdown rates that far above expectation rarely repeat, and the market is paying for them.
Model rank
Market
—
Confidence
high
2026 week 2
Our projection
0.0
Weighted weekly consensus
BDL projection
—
BALLDONTLIE weekly
Sleeper projection
—
Sleeper weekly
Game status
Inactive
No injury description reported
Game market
Total — · Spread —
Implied team total — · cross-book median
Live draft market
ADP 30.4 · Rostered 99.8%
BDL change +0.0%
BALLDONTLIE data checked 9/20/2026, 5:46:10 PM ET. Sportsbook values are consensus context, not betting advice.
Measured 2026 · Regular season
Loading 2026 results…
Actual BALLDONTLIE box scores · FFT-computed fantasy points · Preseason excluded. Missing stats are not zeroes.
2026 / Player Game Center
Brock Bowers · Recorded performance, game context, fantasy takeaways.
Loading game data…
Measured game log
Actual BALLDONTLIE box scores · FFT-computed fantasy points. Missing weeks are never filled with zeroes.
No 2026 regular-season stat line recorded for Brock Bowers yet.
This view will populate automatically when measured games enter the data spine.
FFT Newsroom
Position-relative
Target Command & Offensive Role
91
Elite
Top 2% at TE
Replacement + Draft Economics
97
Elite
Top 2% at TE
TD / High-Value Opportunity
84
Strong
Top 3% at TE
Receiving Talent
80
Strong
Top 8% at TE
Offensive Ecosystem
50
Watch
Top 48% at TE
Fantasy Playoff Schedule
74
Strong
Top 9% at TE
Games
12
Half-PPR
112.2
Total TD
7
The measured inputs doing the most work inside this grade.
Value Over Replacement
+3.2
proj. half-PPR pts
Rank Delta
-11
position spots vs ADP
Value Grade
D
Reach
Market
20.7
FFT value
21.7
Board Δ
-1.0
Week 15
vs DEN
Rank 16th
GreatWeek 16
vs TEN
Rank 12th
GreatWeek 17
@ ARI
Rank 2nd
EliteEvery dot is a real position peer with a market price.
Deep research dossier
The decision dashboard ends above. Open only the research sections you need below—the full evidence remains available without overwhelming the player overview.
Claims written down before the season, sealed at registration, and graded in public — misses kept.
No pre-registered call was made on Brock Bowers. The record holds 29 calls in total, selected from the board by signal strength and divergence — most players do not clear that bar, and silence here means we did not stake a claim on him, not that he graded badly.
What he actually did last season. Measured, not projected.
Games
12
PPR pts
176.2
Half-PPR pts
112.2
PPR / game
14.7
Receiving
Targets
86
Receptions
64
Rec yards
680
Rec TDs
7
Target share
17.4%
Air yards share
17.5%
WOPR
0.38
Rushing
Carries
2
Rush yards
2
Rush TDs
0
Yards / carry
1.00
Passing
Pass yards
0
Pass TDs
0
Interceptions
0
nflverse season totals for 2025, joined on normalised name and position (gsis 00-0039338). These are actuals — nothing here is modelled.
Every ADP source we hold, side by side, and where our model sits against them.
Consensus ADP
20.7
Median
21.0
Sources ranking him
3/4
Agreement
High
| Source | Rank / ADP |
|---|---|
| Yahoo ADP | 21.0 |
| Sleeper ADP | 19.0 |
| RTSports ADP | 22.0 |
| Fantasy Football Calculator ADP (live) | unranked |
The sources that ranked him disagree by 3.0 picks between highest and lowest (standard deviation 1.3).
Mean and median are computed across the sources that actually ranked him — an unranked source never enters the average, because a sentinel treated as a pick number would drag a real player hundreds of slots. Spread, deviation and agreement are null under two ranked sources rather than 0, since one source cannot agree with itself. The FFT model rank is our own output and is never folded in as if it were an outside source.
Consistency and range — the part a season total hides.
Weeks with a line
12
PPR / game
14.7
Std dev
9.7
Coeff. of variation
0.66
Boom rate
25% (3/12)
Bust rate
8% (1/12)
Best week
43.3 wk 9
Worst week
3.7 wk 10
Recent form — last 4 games with a line
15.0 PPR per game over weeks 13, 14, 15, 16 — +0.3 against his season average.
| Wk | Opp | PPR | Tgt | Rec | Yds | Car | RuYd | TD | RZ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | NE | 15.3 | 8 | 5 | 103 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2 | LAC | 8.8 | 8 | 5 | 38 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 3 | WAS | 9.8 | 5 | 4 | 38 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 4 | CHI | 9.6 | 6 | 5 | 46 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 9 | JAX | 43.3 | 13 | 12 | 127 | 1 | 6 | 3 | 5 |
| 10 | DEN | 3.7 | 3 | 1 | 31 | 1 | -4 | 0 | 0 |
| 11 | DAL | 14.2 | 12 | 7 | 72 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 12 | CLE | 11.5 | 9 | 6 | 55 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 13 | LAC | 22.3 | 4 | 4 | 63 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| 14 | DEN | 14.6 | 5 | 4 | 46 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| 15 | PHI | 8.8 | 8 | 6 | 28 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 16 | HOU | 14.3 | 5 | 5 | 33 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
The weekly LINES are measured: 2025 game logs, joined on gsis id 00-0039338. Everything derived from them above — per-game, standard deviation, coefficient of variation, boom and bust rates, recent form — is computed by us and carries the FFT model (beta) label. It is not an observed stat.
This whole block is on the PPR scale, including the thresholds — the artifact publishes boom and bust in PPR (TE: boom ≥ 15, bust ≤ 5) and converting only the points would leave the rates measured against a different ruler than the one they were defined on. The hero above is half-PPR because that is what the model ranks on. Two rulers, each labelled, rather than one silently mixed. Rates need at least 4 games to carry weight; recent form is the last 4.
Route concepts, red-zone opportunity, and separation-adjusted catch rate.
RZ targets
18
RZ carries
—
RZ TDs
6
aDOT
7.1
Concept EPA / target
0.259
Classified targets
86
Catch residual
4.712
YAC over expected
0.97
Most-run concept: QUICK_OUT on 27.9% of his classified targets.
Every field is derived by FFT from openly-licensed nflverse play-by-play, or taken from the free public NFL Next Gen Stats endpoint. No licensed trial data (Sportradar, BALLDONTLIE) is included, which is why this file can be committed and shipped with the build. Red zone: Plays snapped inside the opponent 20-yard line. Red-zone usage measures opportunity; this repo’s own backtest shows it adds little on top of plain volume, so it is retained as context and is deliberately not described as an edge.
The component projection behind the headline number, and what it was built from.
Projected games
12.2
Half-PPR (season)
107.5
PPR (season)
133.7
Confidence
medium
Proj targets
71.6
Proj receptions
52.5
Proj rec yards
549
Proj rec TDs
4.3
Proj carries
1.5
Proj rush yards
4
Proj rush TDs
0.1
Proj pass yards
0
Proj pass TDs
0.0
Proj INTs
0.0
Touchdown regression
He actually scored 7 touchdowns last season. Against his measured opportunity the model expects a change of -2.6. The gap between what a player scored and what his opportunity implies is one of the four signals the edge engine reads.
What this projection was built from
12 g in 2025, 7.2 tgt/g, 86% snaps (regressed to the role, not the position), TE4 on depth chart, age 24, -2.6 TD vs 2025 on red-zone opportunity
fft-projection-2.3.0-beta. The model reads measured production, opportunity and age, and reads no ADP field at any stage — so it can disagree with the market, which is the only reason a disagreement is worth anything. Draft capital was not resolved for this player, which the model treats as unknown rather than as undrafted.
Which sources answered for this player, and which did not.
Model run caveats
How the model works
Inputs, method, and the forbidden-inputs list. It reads no ADP at any stage.
Where it loses
Pre-registered calls, graded in public, misses kept on the page.
Model Rankings
Every player, with the model's BUY / FADE call against consensus ADP built into the board.