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 11:27 PM ET · 13 to play · 1 final
Game Center
Game Center
2022 Week 11 · Sun, Nov 20, 2022 · Empower Field at Mile High
FinalThe verdict · 2022 Week 11
It turned at Q4 0:57, 1st and 10, on Josh Jacobs — 33.9 win-probability points to the Raiders on one snap, the largest move of the game.
The snaps that bent it
Las Vegas Raiders 22–16. Biggest swing: Q4 0:57, Raiders +33.9% win probability on one snap.
The biggest swing of the game · Q4 0:57 · 1st and 10
Josh Jacobs
Raiders
(:57) (No Huddle, Shotgun) 4-D.Carr pass deep left to 28-J.Jacobs to DEN 7 for 43 yards (31-J.Simmons; 47-J.Jewell).
33.9
win-probability points on one snap
The largest move of the game. The two below are drawn against it.
What separated them
Red zone
Broncos owned this one and still lost it — 1 touchdown on 2 trips, against Raiders at 0 touchdowns on 2 trips.
Broncosthe gap went the other way from the scoreboard
Explosive plays
Raiders won this one — 10 chunk plays, against Broncos at 6 chunk plays.
Raidersthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Third down
Broncos owned this one and still lost it — 5 of 13 on third down, against Raiders at 3 of 11 on third down.
Broncosthe gap went the other way from the scoreboard
Running the ball
Raiders won this one — -0.03 expected points per carry, against Broncos at -0.16 expected points per carry.
Raidersthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Who won it for them
What it says about next week
Note
The model against the market, the momentum underneath, every drive — scrub to replay it
The model and the market were 2.1 win-probability points apart on the average play, and 11 apart at the widest — with the model the more convinced about Raiders.
(:57) (No Huddle, Shotgun) 4-D.Carr pass deep left to 28-J.Jacobs to DEN 7 for 43 yards (31-J.Simmons; 47-J.Jewell).
The modelled figures are the league play-by-play model's, not ours.
How the points landed
Davante Adams's 35-yard touchdown catch with 8:31 left in overtime put Las Vegas Raiders ahead for good. It was the last score of the day.
Brandon McManus52-yd field goal52-yard field goalholder C.Waitman · snap J.Bobenmoyer+310–13
Davante Adams35-yd TD catch35-yard touchdown catchfrom Derek CarrLead never changed again+622–169 scores · bar length is the lead after each one
Down-to-down truth
Raiderscategory by categoryBroncos
Deadlocked at 4–4 categories. Biggest gap to Broncos, in red-zone touchdowns.
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: Raiders ran 62 snaps at a 61% dropback rate against Broncos’s 62 at 56%. Red-zone trips: Raiders 2, Broncos 2.
Raiders won the down-to-down efficiency fight: 0.10 expected points added per play vs -0.01.
Derived from the play-by-play, no model
10 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.
LV's play-action rate, 47.4%, was the highest of the 28 team-games charted in week 11 — 6.8 points clear of the next team along.
38 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 10.4 points. · +2.6σ from their own normal
LV's blitz rate sent, 57.1%, is past their previous high of 37.5% in week 9 — the highest of their 10 charted games through week 11.
35 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 12.9 points. · +2.6σ from their own normal
DEN's blitz rate sent, 55.3%, is past their previous high of 37.7% in week 6 — the highest of their 10 charted games through week 11.
38 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 11.6 points. · +2.2σ from their own normal
LV's sack or hit rate, 28.6%, is past their previous high of 19.0% in week 7 — the highest of their 10 charted games through week 11.
35 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 6.9 points. · +2.2σ from their own normal
The season-grain rooms, pointed at this one game
10 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 -21 pts to 14 pts
Over Expected room →Raiders-5.6 ptsright on their number · −2.1 vs their -3.4 pts, and they swing ±6.8 week to week (−0.31× that swing) · 62 snaps
Broncos-3.7 ptsright on their number · −1.2 vs their -2.5 pts, and they swing ±5.4 week to week (−0.22× that swing) · 62 snaps
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 30% to 83%
Tendencies room →Raiders56.9%right on their number · +0.4 vs their 56.4%, and they swing ±10.3 week to week (+0.04× that swing) · 51 early downs
Broncos49.0%inside their normal wobble · −7.2 vs their 56.1%, and they swing ±9.2 week to week (−0.78× that swing) · 49 early downs
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -10% to 52%
Tendencies room →Raiders47.4%off script — faked the run · +26.6 vs their 20.7%, and they swing ±10.4 week to week (+2.57× that swing) · 38 dropbacks
Broncos14.3%right on their number · −3.9 vs their 18.2%, and they swing ±10.8 week to week (−0.36× that swing) · 35 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -35% to 114%
Fourth Down room →Raiders—Only 1 fourth-and-short call tonight — too few to read a tendency. Their season number is 39.4%.
Broncos—Only 2 fourth-and-short calls tonight — too few to read a tendency. Their season number is 26.1%.
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -9% to 62%
Tendencies room →Raiders57.1%off script — sent pressure · +33.1 vs their 24.0%, and they swing ±12.9 week to week (+2.56× that swing) · 35 dropbacks
Broncos55.3%off script — sent pressure · +25.4 vs their 29.9%, and they swing ±11.6 week to week (+2.19× that swing) · 38 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -4% to 31%
Tendencies room →Raiders28.6%off script — got home · +15.1 vs their 13.5%, and they swing ±6.9 week to week (+2.17× that swing) · 35 dropbacks
Broncos10.5%right on their number · −1.6 vs their 12.1%, and they swing ±5.5 week to week (−0.29× that swing) · 38 dropbacks
LV's play-action rate was the night's one real departure: 47.4%, 26.6 points above their season mean of 20.7% and 2.6 times their own 10.4-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.
Las Vegas Raiders
48 dressed · 6 inactive · 1 never used
Inactive · 6
Dressed, never took a snap · 1
Denver Broncos
48 dressed · 7 inactive · 5 never used
Inactive · 7
Dressed, never took a snap · 5
Who moved the needle
Passing · LV
23/37, 307 yds, 2 TD, 0 INT
7.1 expected points added · -3.1% completion over expected
Passing · DEN
24/31, 247 yds, 0 TD, 0 INT
1.5 expected points added · +16.6% completion over expected
Receiving · DEN
5/7 for 80 yds, 0 TD
25% of team targets · 5.5 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.
Davante Adams banked 11.2 more points than his own workload asked for.
| Player | Full PPR | Vs expected | Snap share | Routes | Targets | Air yards | Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Davante AdamsWR · Alpha Receiver | 33.1 | +11.2 | 98% | 100% | 35% | 45% | 7/13, 141 yd, 2 TD |
| Derek CarrQB · Starter QB | 20.3 | +6.3 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 23/37, 307 yd, 2 TD |
| Josh JacobsRB · Bell Cow Back | 19.0 | +1.9 | 80% | 71% | 11% | 5% | 24 car, 109 yd · 3/4, 51 yd |
| Latavius MurrayRB · Bell Cow Back | 17.2 | +0.5 | 50% | 40% | 14% | 0% | 17 car, 49 yd, 1 TD · 4/4, 23 yd |
| Courtland SuttonWR · Alpha Receiver | 13.0 | +3.3 | 92% | 97% | 25% | 47% | 5/7, 80 yd |
| Melvin GordonRB · Committee Back | 12.0 | −0.4 | 45% | 57% | 18% | 2% | 8 car, 31 yd · 5/5, 39 yd |
| Mack HollinsWR · Featured Receiver | 11.2 | −2.6 | 100% | 100% | 24% | 20% | 6/9, 52 yd |
| Russell WilsonQB · Starter QB | 10.7 | +1.3 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 24/31, 247 yd · 1 car, 8 yd |
| Kendall HintonWR · Rotational Receiver | 8.7 | +4.9 | 88% | 86% | 11% | 12% | 3/3, 57 yd |
| Greg DulcichTE · Rotational Receiver | 7.0 | −0.6 | 83% | 86% | 18% | 24% | 4/5, 30 yd |
| Foster MoreauTE · Rotational Receiver | 4.3 | −1.1 | 100% | 100% | 8% | 10% | 1/3, 33 yd |
| Eric SaubertTE · Rotational Receiver | 3.6 | +0.7 | 42% | 37% | 7% | 2% | 2/2, 16 yd |
| Ameer AbdullahRB · Receiving Back | 3.5 | −2.0 | 17% | 26% | 11% | 1% | 3/4, 5 yd |
| Keelan ColeWR · Rotational Receiver | 3.1 | −0.4 | 67% | 82% | 5% | 18% | 1/2, 21 yd |
| Brandon BoldenRB | 1.4 | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | 3 snaps — too few to rate. |
| Brandon JohnsonWR · Rotational Receiver | 1.2 | −2.5 | 34% | 37% | 7% | 20% | 1/2, 2 yd |
| Jakob JohnsonRB | 1.0 | −0.3 | 33% | 16% | 3% | 0% | 1/1, 0 yd |
| Chase EdmondsRB | 0.6 | −0.4 | — | — | — | — | 3 snaps — too few to rate. |
| Montrell WashingtonWR · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | 6 snaps — too few to rate. |
| Brittain BrownRB | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | Did not take a snap. |
| Jesper HorstedTE | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | Did not take a snap. |
| D.J. TurnerWR | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | Did not take a snap. |
6 players played under 8 snaps, so their shares read as a dash rather than a number. 4 lines have no expected-points read and sit 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 Broncos attack right, the Raiders 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.
(9:13) 4-D.Carr pass short middle to 87-F.Moreau to DEN 35 for 33 yards (31-J.Simmons).
OT 9:13 · Raiders · 2nd & 11 at LV 32 · gained 33 · +2.88 EP · +33.4% win probability
161 snaps placed · 16 without a recorded yard line, left off the map · 4 marked moments — the largest win-probability swings, one per drive.
Post-game film: 177 plays across 21 drives, personnel groupings on 177 snaps, manual charting on 148. 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.
9 of 21 drives ended in points. The longest march was DEN moving 92 yards from the DEN 8 for a touchdown. Each bar is the ground a drive actually covered; DEN attacks right, LV 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.
177 plays · ranked by the win probability each one moved
177 plays
Bar length is win probability the play moved
Raiders0
Broncos6Raiders0Broncos7Raiders0Broncos10Raiders6Broncos10Raiders7Broncos10Raiders10Broncos10How the play was built
Empty backfield, nobody in motion.
From outside the pocket.
Raiders10Broncos13Raiders13Broncos13Raiders13Broncos16How the play was built
No huddle, nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read.
How the play was built
No huddle, nobody in motion.
Thrown on the second read.
How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
Thrown on the second read, the ball was not catchable.
Raiders16Broncos16How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read, the ball was not catchable.
How the play was built
Play action, nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read.
How the play was built
Play action, nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read.
Raiders22Broncos16Win 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: Raiders at Broncos, every play.
Full stat lines
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Derek Carr | 23/37 | 307 | 2 | 0 | 1 | +7.1 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Josh Jacobs | 24 | 109 | 4.5 | 0 | −0.7 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Davante Adams | 7 | 13 | 141 | 2 | 35% | +8.0 |
| Mack Hollins | 6 | 9 | 52 | 0 | 24% |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Andrew Billings | 1 | 5 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Maxx Crosby | 5 | 1 | 2.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Roderic Teamer |
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Russell Wilson | 24/31 | 247 | 0 | 0 | 3 | +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_11_LV_DEN
The cards are drawn from the charted play-by-play, not live, and each one says so on its face.
Closing number vs result
Broncos closed -2.5 and lost outright — an upset against the closing number.
Total closed 41.5; the game landed 38 — under by 3.5.
Conditions and crew
Division game — familiarity tightens these matchups; closing numbers tend to be sharper.
| +0.9 |
| Josh Jacobs | 3 | 4 | 51 | 0 | 11% | +2.2 |
| Foster Moreau | 1 | 3 | 33 | 0 | 8% | +1.6 |
| Keelan Cole | 1 | 2 | 21 | 0 | 5% | +0.3 |
| Ameer Abdullah | 3 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 11% | −3.8 |
| Brandon Bolden | 1 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 3% | −0.1 |
| Jakob Johnson | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3% | −0.7 |
| 3 |
| 2 |
| 0.0 |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| Denzel Perryman | 4 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Isaiah Pola-Mao | 3 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Luke Masterson | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Duron Harmon | 3 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jayon Brown | 3 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Bilal Nichols | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Rock Ya-Sin | 3 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Latavius Murray | 17 | 49 | 2.9 | 1 | −1.7 |
| Melvin Gordon | 8 | 31 | 3.9 | 0 | −2.1 |
| Russell Wilson | 1 | 8 | 8.0 | 0 | +2.4 |
| Chase Edmonds | 2 | 6 | 3.0 | 0 | −0.5 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Courtland Sutton | 5 | 7 | 80 | 0 | 25% | +5.5 |
| Kendall Hinton | 3 | 3 | 57 | 0 | 11% | +4.9 |
| Melvin Gordon | 5 | 5 | 39 | 0 | 18% | +1.0 |
| Greg Dulcich | 4 | 5 | 30 | 0 | 18% | −1.4 |
| Latavius Murray | 4 | 4 | 23 | 0 | 14% | +0.5 |
| Eric Saubert | 2 | 2 | 16 | 0 | 7% | +1.1 |
| Brandon Johnson | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 7% | −0.8 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Josey Jewell | 4 | 7 | 1.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Alex Singleton | 6 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Damarri Mathis | 7 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Jonathon Cooper | 4 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Baron Browning | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeShawn Williams | 1 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Patrick Surtain | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kareem Jackson | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Justin Simmons | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mike Purcell | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
