For the complete documentation index, see llms.txt. Markdown variants of the ranked boards (dynasty and fantasy rankings for NFL, NBA, MLB and CFB) are available by appending.mdto those URLs or by sendingAccept: text/markdown; other pages answer 404.
Not startedThis page's interactive half has not started on this device. Nothing was read, and nothing was invented in its place. Reload the page.
polling · 1800s tick · as of 6:41 PM ET · 13 to play · 1 final
Game Center
Game Center
2022 Week 9 · Sun, Nov 6, 2022 · Ford Field
FinalThe verdict · 2022 Week 9
It turned at Q4 1:09, 4th and 2, on Samori Toure — 28.7 win-probability points to the Packers on one snap, the largest move of the game, and it still was not enough.
The snaps that bent it
Detroit Lions 15–9. Biggest swing: Q4 1:09, Packers +28.7% win probability on one snap.
The biggest swing of the game · Q4 1:09 · 4th and 2
Samori Toure
Packers
(1:09) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass deep right to 83-S.Toure to DET 17 for 32 yards (1-J.Okudah). FUMBLES (1-J.Okudah), touched at DET 17, ball out of bounds at DET 17.
28.7
win-probability points on one snap
The largest move of the game. The two below are drawn against it.
What separated them
Giveaways
Lions won this one — 1 giveaway, against Packers at 3 giveaways.
Lionsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Red zone
Lions won this one — 2 touchdowns on 3 trips, against Packers at 1 touchdown on 5 trips.
Lionsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Explosive plays
Packers owned this one and still lost it — 6 chunk plays, against Lions at 4 chunk plays.
Packersthe gap went the other way from the scoreboard
Staying on schedule
Lions won this one — 46% of snaps stayed on schedule, against Packers at 41% of snaps stayed on schedule.
Lionsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Who won it for them
Note
The model against the market, the momentum underneath, every drive — scrub to replay it
The model and the market were 13.6 win-probability points apart on the average play, and 25 apart at the widest — with the model the more convinced about Lions.
(1:09) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass deep right to 83-S.Toure to DET 17 for 32 yards (1-J.Okudah). FUMBLES (1-J.Okudah), touched at DET 17, ball out of bounds at DET 17.
The modelled figures are the league play-by-play model's, not ours.
How the points landed
Shane Zylstra's 1-yard touchdown catch with 0:20 left in the 2nd put Detroit Lions ahead for good. The lead never changed over the 3 scores that followed.
Shane Zylstra1-yd TD catch1-yard touchdown catchfrom Jared Goff · two-point goodLead never changed again+80–84 scores · bar length is the lead after each one
Down-to-down truth
Packerscategory by categoryLions
Lions ahead 5–4 on categories, including the biggest gap of the duel — sacks taken.
Expected points added, per play
The centre line is an average play. A bar to the right of it is a side that gained more than the situation was worth; a bar to the left is a side that lost ground. All six bars share one scale, ±0.35 points.
Every snapexpected points added per play, all downs
Dropping backexpected points added per dropback
Running itexpected points added per rush
Neither side “wins” volume or play-calling mix, so neither is drawn as a duel: Packers ran 69 snaps at a 70% dropback rate against Lions’s 57 at 46%. Red-zone trips: Packers 5, Lions 3.
Packers outgained Lions 390-257 but lost the turnover battle 3-1. That was the game.
Derived from the play-by-play, no model
12 of 12 readings cleared their snap floor and were tested against four comparisons: this week's whole slate, the team's own season, the week before, and the team's own ordinary spread. Every bar below is set in that team's own week-to-week swing, never in league points — one team's swing runs 1.6 to 3.1 times the entire league's spread.
DET's early-down pass rate, 39.5%, is past their previous low of 47.2% in week 3 — the lowest of their 8 charted games through week 9.
43 early downs this game, floor 15 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 9.1 points. · −1.5σ from their own normal
GB's fourth-and-short go rate, 75.0%, is past their previous high of 66.7% in week 8 — the highest of their 6 charted games through week 9.
4 fourth-and-short calls this game, floor 3 — 10 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 24.4 points. · +1.3σ from their own normal
DET's pass rate over expected turned over: +4.0 pts in week 8 against −9.0 pts here — they threw more than the situation asked then and ran more than the situation asked now, a turn of 2.0 of their own weekly swings across the two.
56 snaps this game, floor 20 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 6.4 points. · −1.1σ from their own normal
GB's pass rate over expected turned over: −15.4 pts in week 8 against +3.8 pts here — they ran more than the situation asked then and threw more than the situation asked now, a turn of 2.2 of their own weekly swings across the two.
68 snaps this game, floor 20 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 8.7 points. · +0.8σ from their own normal
The season-grain rooms, pointed at this one game
12 of 12 readings cleared their snap floor. Every deviation below is measured in that team's own game-to-game swing, not in league points — because one game's swing runs from 1.6 to 3.1 times the whole league's spread.
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -25 pts to 19 pts
Over Expected room →Packers3.8 ptsinside their normal wobble · +7.2 vs their -3.4 pts, and they swing ±8.7 week to week (+0.83× that swing) · 68 snaps
Lions-9.0 ptsleaned — ran more than the situation asked · −7.2 vs their -1.8 pts, and they swing ±6.4 week to week (−1.12× that swing) · 56 snaps
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 22% to 84%
Tendencies room →Packers61.2%inside their normal wobble · +8.3 vs their 53.0%, and they swing ±12.3 week to week (+0.67× that swing) · 49 early downs
Lions39.5%leaned — ran early · −13.6 vs their 53.1%, and they swing ±9.1 week to week (−1.48× that swing) · 43 early downs
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -1% to 54%
Tendencies room →Packers33.3%inside their normal wobble · +6.5 vs their 26.8%, and they swing ±10.8 week to week (+0.61× that swing) · 48 dropbacks
Lions30.8%right on their number · +3.1 vs their 27.7%, and they swing ±8.5 week to week (+0.36× that swing) · 26 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -19% to 114%
Fourth Down room →Packers75.0%leaned — went for it · +30.7 vs their 44.3%, and they swing ±24.4 week to week (+1.26× that swing) · 4 fourth-and-short calls
Lions66.7%inside their normal wobble · +16.0 vs their 50.7%, and they swing ±24.5 week to week (+0.65× that swing) · 3 fourth-and-short calls
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -9% to 63%
Tendencies room →Packers26.9%right on their number · +4.1 vs their 22.8%, and they swing ±12.0 week to week (+0.34× that swing) · 26 dropbacks
Lions16.7%leaned — sat back · −16.4 vs their 33.1%, and they swing ±11.2 week to week (−1.47× that swing) · 48 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -7% to 37%
Tendencies room →Packers11.5%inside their normal wobble · −5.2 vs their 16.7%, and they swing ±8.0 week to week (−0.65× that swing) · 26 dropbacks
Lions10.4%right on their number · −4.2 vs their 14.6%, and they swing ±8.6 week to week (−0.49× that swing) · 48 dropbacks
DET's early-down pass rate was the night's one real departure: 39.5%, 13.6 points below their season mean of 53.1% and 1.5 times their own 9.1-point weekly swing.
Who was out, who dressed and never took a snap, and who was on the field how much. Game-day list and snap counts from the weekly roster and snap feeds. Practice-squad and injured-reserve players are not shown — they were never on the game-day list.
Green Bay Packers
48 dressed · 5 inactive · 1 never used
Inactive · 5
Dressed, never took a snap · 1
Detroit Lions
48 dressed · 7 inactive · 1 never used
Inactive · 7
Dressed, never took a snap · 1
Who moved the needle
Passing · GB
23/43, 291 yds, 1 TD, 3 INT
-13.5 expected points added · -4.7% completion over expected
Passing · DET
14/26, 137 yds, 2 TD, 1 INT
-1.5 expected points added · -17.7% completion over expected
Receiving · DET
4/9 for 55 yds, 0 TD
38% of team targets · -7.4 expected points added
What each man’s workload was worth, against what he actually banked. Final. Usage and expected points land the morning after the game, not live.
James Mitchell banked 3.0 more points than his own workload asked for.
| Player | Full PPR | Vs expected | Snap share | Routes | Targets | Air yards | Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Allen LazardWR · Alpha Receiver | 18.7 | −4.9 | 88% | 96% | 25% | 36% | 4/10, 87 yd, 1 TD |
| Aaron RodgersQB · Starter QB | 13.6 | −20.3 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 23/43, 291 yd, 1 TD, 3 INT · 4 car, 40 yd |
| Jared GoffQB · Starter QB | 11.4 | −6.1 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 14/26, 137 yd, 2 TD, 1 INT · 1 car, -1 yd |
| Jamaal WilliamsRB · Bell Cow Back | 10.1 | −6.7 | 61% | 46% | 0% | — | 24 car, 81 yd |
| Amon-Ra St. BrownWR · Alpha Receiver | 9.5 | −6.5 | 97% | 100% | 38% | 84% | 4/9, 55 yd |
| Josiah DeguaraTE · Rotational Receiver | 9.1 | +1.1 | 38% | 35% | 13% | 7% | 5/5, 41 yd |
| James MitchellTE · Rotational Receiver | 8.8 | +3.0 | 21% | 19% | 8% | 5% | 2/2, 8 yd, 1 TD |
| D'Andre SwiftRB · Receiving Back | 8.0 | +0.3 | 16% | 27% | 17% | 10% | 2 car, 10 yd · 3/4, 40 yd |
| Shane ZylstraTE · Rotational Receiver | 7.1 | +2.5 | 26% | 31% | 4% | 1% | 1/1, 1 yd, 1 TD |
| Aaron JonesRB | 6.5 | −0.9 | 41% | 35% | 5% | 0% | 9 car, 25 yd · 2/2, 20 yd |
| A.J. DillonRB · Committee Back | 6.4 | −12.1 | 66% | 69% | 10% | 3% | 11 car, 34 yd · 2/4, 10 yd |
| Robert TonyanTE · Rotational Receiver | 5.9 | −2.9 | 46% | 50% | 10% | 11% | 3/4, 29 yd |
| Samori ToureWR · Rotational Receiver | 5.4 | −2.7 | 38% | 46% | 10% | 23% | 2/4, 34 yd |
| Kalif RaymondWR · Rotational Receiver | 4.7 | +0.2 | 95% | 96% | 13% | 0% | 3/3, 17 yd |
| Christian WatsonWR · Rotational Receiver | 4.4 | +1.3 | 23% | 25% | 5% | 4% | 2/2, 24 yd |
| Marcedes LewisTE · Rotational Receiver | 2.9 | +0.3 | 43% | 35% | 3% | 3% | 1/1, 19 yd |
| Romeo DoubsWR · Rotational Receiver | 2.8 | +0.6 | — | — | — | — | 1 snap — too few to rate. |
| Justin JacksonRB | 2.7 | +0.6 | 21% | 27% | 0% | — | 4 car, 27 yd |
| Tom KennedyWR · Rotational Receiver | 2.6 | −5.3 | 66% | 73% | 17% | 13% | 1/4, 16 yd |
| Sammy WatkinsWR · Rotational Receiver | 1.9 | −10.3 | 81% | 83% | 13% | 5% | 1/5, 9 yd |
| Kylin HillRB | 0.7 | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | 1 snap — too few to rate. |
| Brock WrightTE · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | −1.5 | 81% | 73% | 4% | 0% | 0/1, 0 yd |
| Brandon ZylstraWR | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | Did not take a snap. |
| Amari RodgersWR · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | −3.0 | 26% | 19% | 3% | 4% | 0/1, 0 yd |
3 players played under 8 snaps, so their shares read as a dash rather than a number. 1 line has no expected-points read and sits off the plane.
Expected points are modelled in full PPR, so the “vs expected” column stays in that unit whichever format the pills are set to. Switching the pills changes the points column, not the plane.
The whole game as one hundred yards. The Lions attack right, the Packers attack left, so a change of possession is a reversal you can see. Reading down is the order the snaps were played — not the clock, so a two-minute drill gets the same room as any other fourteen snaps. This game is final.
(1:09) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass deep right to 83-S.Toure to DET 17 for 32 yards (1-J.Okudah). FUMBLES (1-J.Okudah), touched at DET 17, ball out of bounds at DET 17.
Q4 1:09 · Packers · 4th & 2 at DET 49 · gained 32 · +4.02 EP · +23.7% win probability
151 snaps placed · 12 without a recorded yard line, left off the map · 4 marked moments — the largest win-probability swings, one per drive.
Post-game film: 163 plays across 18 drives, personnel groupings on 163 snaps, manual charting on 143. Everything here paints the morning after the week's games — there is no live play-level feed in this product, so nothing on this page updates while a game is being played.
4 of 18 drives ended in points. The longest march was GB moving 88 yards from the GB 7 for a turnover. Each bar is the ground a drive actually covered; DET attacks right, GB attacks left. Hatching marks a trip inside the twenty.
Offensive grouping on every pass and run. A group needs five snaps in this game before it gets a number — under that the sample is a coin flip and the cell reads a dash instead. The names of the eleven on the field are only recorded from 2023 onward, so this game gives the grouping without the roster.
163 plays · ranked by the win probability each one moved
163 plays
Bar length is win probability the play movedHow the play was built
A run-pass option, play action, a man in motion.
Thrown on the first read, it should have been intercepted.
How the play was built
Empty backfield, nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read, caught in traffic.
How the play was built
Play action, nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read, it should have been intercepted.
How the play was built
Empty backfield, nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read, caught in traffic.
Packers0
Lions6Packers0Lions8How the play was built
Three in the backfield, play action, a man in motion.
Thrown on the first read, it should have been intercepted.
How the play was built
Empty backfield, nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read, it should have been intercepted.
How the play was built
Play action, a man in motion.
Thrown on the first read, caught in traffic.
Packers6Lions8Packers6Lions14Packers6Lions15Packers9Lions15How the play was built
A man in motion.
Thrown on the first read, caught in traffic.
How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
Thrown on the second read, the receiver created it himself.
How the play was built
Empty backfield, nobody in motion.
Thrown on the second read, caught in traffic.
Win probability is the league play-by-play model, 98.5% of plays · a dash means none was published
Just the plays, on their own page: Packers at Lions, every play.
Full stat lines
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aaron Rodgers | 23/43 | 291 | 1 | 3 | 1 | −13.5 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aaron Rodgers | 4 | 40 | 10.0 | 0 | +7.8 |
| A.J. Dillon | 11 | 34 | 3.1 | 0 | −0.8 |
| Aaron Jones |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Allen Lazard | 4 | 10 | 87 | 1 | 25% | −1.8 |
| Josiah Deguara | 5 | 5 | 41 | 0 | 13% |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Krys Barnes | 4 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kenny Clark | 3 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Rasul Douglas |
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jared Goff | 14/26 | 137 | 2 | 1 | 0 | −1.5 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|
Every number on them comes from the same read as this page, and each one says in words where it came from.
How the win probability moved, the three snaps that bent it, and every drive in order.
/football/games/2022_09_GB_DET
The cards are drawn from the charted play-by-play, not live, and each one says so on its face.
Closing number vs result
Packers closed -4 and lost outright — an upset against the closing number.
Total closed 49.5; the game landed 24 — under by 25.5.
Conditions and crew
Division game — familiarity tightens these matchups; closing numbers tend to be sharper.
| 9 |
| 25 |
| 2.8 |
| 0 |
| −2.3 |
| Kylin Hill | 1 | 7 | 7.0 | 0 | +0.5 |
| +1.7 |
| Samori Toure | 2 | 4 | 34 | 0 | 10% | +1.0 |
| Robert Tonyan | 3 | 4 | 29 | 0 | 10% | −3.1 |
| Christian Watson | 2 | 2 | 24 | 0 | 5% | +3.8 |
| Aaron Jones | 2 | 2 | 20 | 0 | 5% | −0.3 |
| Marcedes Lewis | 1 | 1 | 19 | 0 | 3% | +1.7 |
| Romeo Doubs | 1 | 1 | 18 | 0 | 3% | +1.3 |
| A.J. Dillon | 2 | 4 | 10 | 0 | 10% | −2.9 |
| Sammy Watkins | 1 | 5 | 9 | 0 | 13% | −4.2 |
| David Bakhtiari | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3% | −6.0 |
| Amari Rodgers | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3% | −1.0 |
| 4 |
| 1 |
| 0.0 |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| Quay Walker | 4 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Adrian Amos | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Darnell Savage | 3 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Isaiah McDuffie | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dean Lowry | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jaire Alexander | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | 1 |
| Rashan Gary | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jamaal Williams | 24 | 81 | 3.4 | 0 | −6.0 |
| Justin Jackson | 4 | 27 | 6.8 | 0 | +0.9 |
| D'Andre Swift | 2 | 10 | 5.0 | 0 | −0.6 |
| Jared Goff | 1 | -1 | -1.0 | 0 | +0.0 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amon-Ra St. Brown | 4 | 9 | 55 | 0 | 38% | −7.4 |
| D'Andre Swift | 3 | 4 | 40 | 0 | 17% | +5.7 |
| Kalif Raymond | 3 | 3 | 17 | 0 | 13% | +1.9 |
| Tom Kennedy | 1 | 4 | 16 | 0 | 17% | −3.6 |
| James Mitchell | 2 | 2 | 8 | 1 | 8% | +2.8 |
| Shane Zylstra | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4% | +1.8 |
| Brock Wright | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4% | −1.0 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Derrick Barnes | 2 | 8 | 1.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Kerby Joseph | 4 | 5 | 0.0 | 2 | 3 |
| DeShon Elliott | 4 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Will Harris | 3 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Julian Okwara | 2 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mike Hughes | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| John Cominsky | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jeff Okudah | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Aidan Hutchinson | 0 | 2 | 0.0 | 1 | 1 |
| Anthony Pittman | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
