Live board
Today's Read
Scored 13 TDs on 30 red-zone opportunities — opportunity implies about 16.83. Finishing that far below expectation tends to regress upward, and the market is still pricing the 13.
Model rank
Market
—
Confidence
low
QB · NO · Bye 8
Elite Profile
Calibrated public rating
Projection
15.6
Half-PPR / game
Market ADP
143.0
Consensus overall
FFT fair value
140.0
Calibrated pick
Draft delta
+3.0
Market minus FFT
Draft recommendation
Target ahead of market
Risk / reliability
Medium Risk
Reliability
64 / 99
Coverage
80%
Live board
Scored 13 TDs on 30 red-zone opportunities — opportunity implies about 16.83. Finishing that far below expectation tends to regress upward, and the market is still pricing the 13.
Model rank
Market
—
Confidence
low
2026 week 2
Our projection
15.4
Weighted weekly consensus
BDL projection
15.1
BALLDONTLIE weekly
Sleeper projection
15.5
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 149.8 · Rostered 49.7%
BDL change +0.9%
BALLDONTLIE data checked 9/20/2026, 6:44:12 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
Tyler Shough · 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 Tyler Shough yet.
This view will populate automatically when measured games enter the data spine.
FFT Newsroom
Position-relative
Fantasy Scoring Dominance
77
Strong
Top 19% at QB
Rushing Leverage
81
Strong
Top 6% at QB
Replacement + Draft Economics
85
Elite
Top 15% at QB
Passing Engine
67
Average
Top 18% at QB
Offensive Ecosystem
65
Average
Top 23% at QB
Fantasy Playoff Schedule
64
Average
Top 21% at QB
Games
11
Half-PPR
157.96
Total TD
13
The measured inputs doing the most work inside this grade.
Value Over Replacement
-6.1
proj. half-PPR pts
Rank Delta
+1
position spots vs ADP
Value Grade
B
Fair Value
Market
143.0
FFT value
140.0
Board Δ
+3.0
Week 15
@ TB
Rank 4th
EliteWeek 16
vs ARI
Rank 14th
GreatWeek 17
@ ATL
Rank 16th
GreatEvery 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 Tyler Shough. 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
11
PPR pts
158.0
Half-PPR pts
158.0
PPR / game
14.4
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
45
Rush yards
186
Rush TDs
3
Yards / carry
4.13
Passing
Pass yards
2384
Pass TDs
10
Interceptions
6
nflverse season totals for 2025, joined on normalised name and position (gsis 00-0040743). These are actuals — nothing here is modelled.
Every ADP source we hold, side by side, and where our model sits against them.
Consensus ADP
143.0
Median
147.0
Sources ranking him
3/4
Agreement
Medium
| Source | Rank / ADP |
|---|---|
| Yahoo ADP | 159.0 |
| Sleeper ADP | 147.0 |
| RTSports ADP | 123.0 |
| Fantasy Football Calculator ADP (live) | unranked |
The sources that ranked him disagree by 36.0 picks between highest and lowest (standard deviation 15.0).
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.
Consistency and range — the part a season total hides.
Weeks with a line
11
PPR / game
14.4
Std dev
7.3
Coeff. of variation
0.51
Boom rate
0% (0/11)
Bust rate
36% (4/11)
Best week
21.9 wk 17
Worst week
0.0 wk 3
Recent form — last 4 games with a line
19.7 PPR per game over weeks 15, 16, 17, 18 — +5.4 against his season average.
| Wk | Opp | PPR | Tgt | Rec | Yds | Car | RuYd | TD | RZ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | SEA | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 8 | TB | 4.3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 12 | 0 | 1 |
| 9 | LA | 9.2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 3 |
| 10 | CAR | 19.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | -3 | 2 | 6 |
| 12 | ATL | 7.9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 22 | 0 | 4 |
| 13 | MIA | 17.4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 18 | 2 | 2 |
| 14 | TB | 21.3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 55 | 2 | 2 |
| 15 | CAR | 18.1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 32 | 1 | 4 |
| 16 | NYJ | 17.1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 8 | 1 | 3 |
| 17 | TEN | 21.9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 6 | 2 | 4 |
| 18 | ATL | 21.8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 34 | 2 | 5 |
The weekly LINES are measured: 2025 game logs, joined on gsis id 00-0040743. 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
42
RZ TDs
9
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
16.2
Half-PPR (season)
253.2
PPR (season)
253.3
Confidence
medium
Proj targets
0.2
Proj receptions
0.1
Proj rec yards
0
Proj rec TDs
0.0
Proj carries
64.8
Proj rush yards
289
Proj rush TDs
5.1
Proj pass yards
3439
Proj pass TDs
19.6
Proj INTs
9.4
Touchdown regression
He actually scored 13 touchdowns last season. Against his measured opportunity the model expects a change of 11.8. 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
11 g in 2025, 29.7 att/g, 83% snaps (regressed to the role, not the position), QB1 on depth chart, age 27, +11.8 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.