Live board
Today's Read
Scored 19 TDs on 61 red-zone opportunities — opportunity implies about 21.35. Finishing that far below expectation tends to regress upward, and the market is still pricing the 19.
Model rank
Market
—
Confidence
low
QB · NYJ · Bye 13
Elite Profile
Calibrated public rating
Projection
13.5
Half-PPR / game
Market ADP
184.0
Consensus overall
FFT fair value
190.9
Calibrated pick
Draft delta
-6.9
Market minus FFT
Draft recommendation
Market is aggressive
Risk / reliability
Low Risk
Reliability
75 / 99
Coverage
80%
Live board
Scored 19 TDs on 61 red-zone opportunities — opportunity implies about 21.35. Finishing that far below expectation tends to regress upward, and the market is still pricing the 19.
Model rank
Market
—
Confidence
low
2026 week 2
Our projection
14.6
Weighted weekly consensus
BDL projection
15.2
BALLDONTLIE weekly
Sleeper projection
14.9
Sleeper weekly
Game status
Not reported
No injury description reported
Latest practice
Not reported
Game-day active
Active
Started
Yes
Participation
Played
Game market
Total — · Spread —
Implied team total — · cross-book median
Live draft market
ADP 170.1 · Rostered 3.8%
BDL change +0.1%
BALLDONTLIE data checked 9/20/2026, 5:44:26 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
Geno Smith · 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 Geno Smith yet.
This view will populate automatically when measured games enter the data spine.
FFT Newsroom
Position-relative
Fantasy Scoring Dominance
63
Average
Top 28% at QB
Rushing Leverage
66
Average
Top 20% at QB
Replacement + Draft Economics
74
Strong
Top 25% at QB
Passing Engine
51
Watch
Top 35% at QB
Offensive Ecosystem
23
Watch
Top 78% at QB
Fantasy Playoff Schedule
26
Watch
Top 96% at QB
Games
15
Half-PPR
173.9
Total TD
19
The measured inputs doing the most work inside this grade.
Value Over Replacement
-55.5
proj. half-PPR pts
Rank Delta
+1
position spots vs ADP
Value Grade
B
Fair Value
Market
184.0
FFT value
190.9
Board Δ
-6.9
Week 15
@ ARI
Rank 14th
GreatWeek 16
vs NE
Rank 22nd
NeutralWeek 17
vs MIN
Rank 32nd
ToughEvery 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 Geno Smith. 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
15
PPR pts
173.9
Half-PPR pts
173.9
PPR / game
11.6
Receiving
Targets
0
Receptions
0
Rec yards
0
Rec TDs
0
Target share
0.0%
Air yards share
0.0%
WOPR
0.00
Rushing
Carries
41
Rush yards
109
Rush TDs
0
Yards / carry
2.66
Passing
Pass yards
3025
Pass TDs
19
Interceptions
17
nflverse season totals for 2025, joined on normalised name and position (gsis 00-0030565). These are actuals — nothing here is modelled.
Every ADP source we hold, side by side, and where our model sits against them.
Consensus ADP
184.0
Median
184.0
Sources ranking him
1/4
Agreement
—
| Source | Rank / ADP |
|---|---|
| Yahoo ADP | unranked |
| Sleeper ADP | unranked |
| RTSports ADP | 184.0 |
| Fantasy Football Calculator ADP (live) | unranked |
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
15
PPR / game
11.6
Std dev
7.0
Coeff. of variation
0.61
Boom rate
13% (2/15)
Bust rate
80% (12/15)
Best week
26.3 wk 9
Worst week
2.8 wk 7
Recent form — last 4 games with a line
10.5 PPR per game over weeks 13, 14, 16, 17 — -1.1 against his season average.
| Wk | Opp | PPR | Tgt | Rec | Yds | Car | RuYd | TD | RZ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | NE | 17.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 10 | 1 | 1 |
| 2 | LAC | 3.2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 20 | 0 | 7 |
| 3 | WAS | 26.1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 3 |
| 4 | CHI | 9.8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 31 | 2 | 4 |
| 5 | IND | 5.9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 8 | 0 | 9 |
| 6 | TEN | 8.7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | -3 | 1 | 4 |
| 7 | KC | 2.8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| 9 | JAX | 26.3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 9 | 4 | 8 |
| 10 | DEN | 4.4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 1 |
| 11 | DAL | 12.9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 14 | 1 | 8 |
| 12 | CLE | 14.2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 8 | 1 | 3 |
| 13 | LAC | 12.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | -6 | 2 | 5 |
| 14 | DEN | 9.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 5 |
| 16 | HOU | 14.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| 17 | NYG | 7.1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
The weekly LINES are measured: 2025 game logs, joined on gsis id 00-0030565. 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 (QB: boom ≥ 25, bust ≤ 15) 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
0
RZ carries
73
RZ TDs
15
aDOT
—
Concept EPA / target
—
Classified targets
—
Catch residual
—
YAC over expected
—
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
15.1
Half-PPR (season)
203.8
PPR (season)
203.8
Confidence
medium
Proj targets
0.1
Proj receptions
0.1
Proj rec yards
0
Proj rec TDs
0.0
Proj carries
41.4
Proj rush yards
181
Proj rush TDs
2.8
Proj pass yards
3043
Proj pass TDs
18.7
Proj INTs
12.1
Touchdown regression
He actually scored 19 touchdowns last season. Against his measured opportunity the model expects a change of 2.5. 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
15 g in 2025, 29.9 att/g, 96% snaps (regressed to the role, not the position), QB1 on depth chart, age 36, new team NYJ, +2.5 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.