Skip to main content
Joe Burrow headshot
Position: QuarterbackE Tier

Joe Burrow

QB · CIN · Bye 6

Age 296'4"215 lbs6 yr
FFT9981

Elite Profile

Calibrated public rating

RAW 74 · 91% cov

Projection

18.0

Half-PPR / game

Market ADP

51.0

Consensus overall

FFT fair value

59.6

Calibrated pick

Draft delta

-8.6

Market minus FFT

Draft recommendation

Market is aggressive

Risk / reliability

Medium Risk

57
Risk: Medium

Reliability

57 / 99

Coverage

80%

Live board

Today's Read

NO MARKET DATA

Measured, and nothing about him departs from what the market is already pricing.

Model rank

Market

Confidence

low

Full analysis

2026 week 2

Weekly Outlook

FFT · BDL · SLEEPER · MARKETS

Our projection

17.3

Weighted weekly consensus

BDL projection

16.5

BALLDONTLIE weekly

Sleeper projection

17.8

Sleeper weekly

Game status

Not reported

No injury description reported

Latest practice

full

Game-day active

Active

Started

Yes

Participation

Played

Game market

Total · Spread

Implied team total · cross-book median

Live draft market

ADP 62.4 · Rostered 97.4%

BDL change -1.6%

BALLDONTLIE data checked 9/20/2026, 5:44:51 PM ET. Sportsbook values are consensus context, not betting advice.

Measured 2026 · Regular season

Season Production

Loading 2026 results…

Actual BALLDONTLIE box scores · FFT-computed fantasy points · Preseason excluded. Missing stats are not zeroes.

2026 / Player Game Center

Every play has a story.

Joe Burrow · Recorded performance, game context, fantasy takeaways.

Loading game data…

Measured game log

Weekly Performance

Actual BALLDONTLIE box scores · FFT-computed fantasy points. Missing weeks are never filled with zeroes.

No 2026 regular-season stat line recorded for Joe Burrow yet.

This view will populate automatically when measured games enter the data spine.

FFT Newsroom

Latest news for Joe Burrow

All reports

Position-relative

FFT99 Pillar Scores

Methodology

Fantasy Scoring Dominance

86

Elite

86

Top 10% at QB

Rushing Leverage

51

Watch

51

Top 34% at QB

Replacement + Draft Economics

94

Elite

94

Top 6% at QB

Passing Engine

83

Strong

83

Top 5% at QB

Offensive Ecosystem

78

Strong

78

Top 5% at QB

Fantasy Playoff Schedule

49

Watch

49

Top 62% at QB

Player Profile

Fantasy Scoring Dominance86
Rushing Leverage51
Replacement + Draft Economics94
Passing Engine83
Offensive Ecosystem78
Fantasy Playoff Schedule49

Games

8

Half-PPR

134.46

Total TD

17

Model Component Contributions

The measured inputs doing the most work inside this grade.

Proj Ppg
14%
Value Over Replacement
13%
Prior Ppg
9%
Boom Rate
7%
Rush Ypg
6%
Floor Rate
5%
Designed Attempts
5%
Scramble Rate
3%

Draft Economics

Value Over Replacement

+28.2

proj. half-PPR pts

Rank Delta

-6

position spots vs ADP

Value Grade

C

Slight Reach

reachfair valuesteal

Market

51.0

FFT value

59.6

Board Δ

-8.6

Playoff Schedule

Week 15

@ CAR

Rank 27th

Tough

Week 16

@ IND

Rank 15th

Great

Week 17

vs BAL

Rank 12th

Great

FFT99 vs ADP

Every dot is a real position peer with a market price.

Joe BurrowCONSENSUS ADP →FFT99 →

Deep research dossier

Evidence, history and model transparency

The decision dashboard ends above. Open only the research sections you need below—the full evidence remains available without overwhelming the player overview.

The call record

Claims written down before the season, sealed at registration, and graded in public — misses kept.

No pre-registered call was made on Joe Burrow. 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.

2025 production

What he actually did last season. Measured, not projected.

Games

8

PPR pts

134.5

Half-PPR pts

134.5

PPR / game

16.8

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

14

Rush yards

41

Rush TDs

0

Yards / carry

2.93

Passing

Pass yards

1809

Pass TDs

17

Interceptions

5

nflverse season totals for 2025, joined on normalised name and position (gsis 00-0036442). These are actuals — nothing here is modelled.

What the market says

Every ADP source we hold, side by side, and where our model sits against them.

Consensus ADP

51.0

Median

52.0

Sources ranking him

3/4

Agreement

Medium

SourceRank / ADP
Yahoo ADP42.0
Sleeper ADP59.0
RTSports ADP52.0
Fantasy Football Calculator ADP (live)unranked

The sources that ranked him disagree by 17.0 picks between highest and lowest (standard deviation 7.0).

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.

Week-to-week, 2025

Consistency and range — the part a season total hides.

Weeks with a line

8

PPR / game

16.8

Std dev

8.0

Coeff. of variation

0.48

Boom rate

13% (1/8)

Bust rate

38% (3/8)

Best week

29.0 wk 16

Worst week

5.5 wk 15

Recent form — last 4 games with a line

19.0 PPR per game over weeks 15, 16, 17, 18+2.2 against his season average.

Every week (8 lines)
WkOppPPRTgtRecYdsCarRuYdTDRZ
1CLE8.80002314
2JAX7.00000013
13BAL19.200038214
14BUF23.40000043
15BAL5.50002504
16MIA29.00002645
17ARI20.40003225
18CLE21.100021736

The weekly LINES are measured: 2025 game logs, joined on gsis id 00-0036442. 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.

Advanced usage & efficiency

Route concepts, red-zone opportunity, and separation-adjusted catch rate.

Red-zone opportunity

Scoring upside

RZ targets

0

RZ carries

46

RZ TDs

14

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.

How the model gets there

The component projection behind the headline number, and what it was built from.

Projected games

16.0

Half-PPR (season)

287.5

PPR (season)

287.5

Confidence

medium

Proj targets

0.2

Proj receptions

0.1

Proj rec yards

0

Proj rec TDs

0.0

Proj carries

36.9

Proj rush yards

165

Proj rush TDs

2.6

Proj pass yards

3889

Proj pass TDs

30.9

Proj INTs

9.9

Touchdown regression

He actually scored 17 touchdowns last season. Against his measured opportunity the model expects a change of 16.5. 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

8 g in 2025, 32.4 att/g, 88% snaps (regressed to the role, not the position), QB1 on depth chart, age 30, +16.5 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.

What this page is standing on

Which sources answered for this player, and which did not.

  • Identity join: Resolved to gsis 00-0036442 via the 2025 nflverse season file. The weekly log and advanced splits are keyed on that id.
  • Market ADP: A bundled snapshot of platform ADP, not a live feed. Shown for comparison and never read by the projection model.
  • Headshot: Resolved from exact-name.
  • Vitals: Height, weight, college and jersey are read from nflverse and keyed on gsis id 00-0036442 — not on name. Name keying matches players to relatives who share one: "Marvin Harrison Jr." also matches his father's 1996 row, and whichever came first in the file would win.
  • Not shown: draft round and pick. The bundled player file carries them on roughly 48% of rows and populates them late, so a blank is equally consistent with a genuine undrafted free agent and with a first-rounder nobody has ingested yet. The model’s own three-state read is used instead, above.

Model run caveats

  • No usable red-zone RECEIVING fit for QB — receiving touchdowns at that position come from the shrunk per-target rate alone.
  • Rookie draft capital on this run: 82 drafted (projected from round/pick), 141 confirmed undrafted, 177 with capital UNKNOWN.
  • 177 of 400 rookie projections (44%) have NO KNOWN DRAFT CAPITAL because this draft class has not been ingested by any source the model can read. For those players the draft-capital path did not run: a first-round pick and a camp arm receive the same number, separated only by depth-chart order. Those projections are flagged `isPositionalFloor` and must be read as a floor for the role, not as a valuation of the player.

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.