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 8:35 AM ET · 13 to play · 1 final
Game Center
Game Center
2022 Week 18 · Sun, Jan 8, 2023 · Lambeau Field
FinalThe verdict · 2022 Week 18
It turned at Q3 8:53, 1st and 10, on Kalif Raymond — 15.9 win-probability points to the Lions on one snap, the largest move of the game.
The snaps that bent it
Detroit Lions 20–16. Biggest swing: Q3 8:53, Lions +15.9% win probability on one snap.
The biggest swing of the game · Q3 8:53 · 1st and 10
Kalif Raymond
Lions
(8:53) 16-J.Goff pass deep right to 11-K.Raymond to GB 1 for 43 yards (20-R.Ford).
15.9
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 — no giveaways, against Packers at 2 giveaways.
Lionsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Every snap
Lions won this one — +0.15 expected points per snap, against Packers at -0.15 expected points per snap.
Lionsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Throwing the ball
Lions won this one — +0.21 expected points per dropback, against Packers at -0.21 expected points per dropback.
Lionsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Staying on schedule
Lions won this one — 54% of snaps stayed on schedule, against Packers at 46% of snaps stayed on schedule.
Lionsthe 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 8.2 win-probability points apart on the average play, and 16 apart at the widest — with the model the more convinced about Lions.
(8:53) 16-J.Goff pass deep right to 11-K.Raymond to GB 1 for 43 yards (20-R.Ford).
The modelled figures are the league play-by-play model's, not ours.
How the points landed
Jamaal Williams's 1-yard rushing touchdown with 5:57 left in the 4th put Detroit Lions ahead for good. It was the last score of the day.
8 scores · bar length is the lead after each one
Down-to-down truth
Lionscategory by categoryPackers
Lions ahead 8–0 on categories, including the biggest gap of the duel — turnovers.
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: Lions ran 59 snaps at a 61% dropback rate against Packers’s 57 at 54%. Red-zone trips: Lions 5, Packers 3.
Lions won the down-to-down efficiency fight: 0.15 expected points added per play vs -0.15.
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.
1 of 12 readings cleared their snap floor in this game, which is under the three this column needs before it will draw the rule. The readings themselves stand.
DET's play-action rate turned over: 48.4% in week 17 against 22.2% here — they faked the run then and dropped back clean now, a turn of 3.1 of their own weekly swings across the two.
36 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 8.5 points. · −0.6σ 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 →Lions2.5 ptsinside their normal wobble · +4.3 vs their -1.8 pts, and they swing ±6.4 week to week (+0.68× that swing) · 59 snaps
Packers-5.1 ptsright on their number · −1.7 vs their -3.4 pts, and they swing ±8.7 week to week (−0.20× that swing) · 57 snaps
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 22% to 84%
Tendencies room →Lions57.8%inside their normal wobble · +4.7 vs their 53.1%, and they swing ±9.1 week to week (+0.51× that swing) · 45 early downs
Packers48.8%right on their number · −4.1 vs their 53.0%, and they swing ±12.3 week to week (−0.34× that swing) · 43 early downs
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -1% to 54%
Tendencies room →Lions22.2%inside their normal wobble · −5.5 vs their 27.7%, and they swing ±8.5 week to week (−0.64× that swing) · 36 dropbacks
Packers29.0%right on their number · +2.2 vs their 26.8%, and they swing ±10.8 week to week (+0.21× that swing) · 31 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -19% to 114%
Fourth Down room →Lions40.0%right on their number · −10.7 vs their 50.7%, and they swing ±24.5 week to week (−0.44× that swing) · 5 fourth-and-short calls
Packers50.0%right on their number · +5.7 vs their 44.3%, and they swing ±24.4 week to week (+0.23× that swing) · 4 fourth-and-short calls
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -9% to 63%
Tendencies room →Lions32.3%right on their number · −0.8 vs their 33.1%, and they swing ±11.2 week to week (−0.07× that swing) · 31 dropbacks
Packers36.1%leaned — sent pressure · +13.3 vs their 22.8%, and they swing ±12.0 week to week (+1.11× that swing) · 36 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -7% to 37%
Tendencies room →Lions22.6%inside their normal wobble · +7.9 vs their 14.6%, and they swing ±8.6 week to week (+0.93× that swing) · 31 dropbacks
Packers8.3%leaned — stayed blocked · −8.4 vs their 16.7%, and they swing ±8.0 week to week (−1.05× that swing) · 36 dropbacks
GB's blitz rate sent was the night's one real departure: 36.1%, 13.3 points above their season mean of 22.8% and 1.1 times their own 12.0-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.
Detroit Lions
48 dressed · 7 inactive · 1 never used
Inactive · 7
Dressed, never took a snap · 1
Green Bay Packers
48 dressed · 5 inactive · 1 never used
Inactive · 5
Dressed, never took a snap · 1
Who moved the needle
Passing · DET
23/34, 224 yds, 0 TD, 0 INT
7.5 expected points added · -0.0% completion over expected
Passing · GB
17/27, 205 yds, 1 TD, 1 INT
-1.3 expected points added · +3.5% completion over expected
Receiving · GB
5/6 for 104 yds, 0 TD
23% of team targets · 3.9 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.
Christian Watson banked 5.1 more points than his own workload asked for.
| Player | Full PPR | Vs expected | Snap share | Routes | Targets | Air yards | Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jamaal WilliamsRB · Bell Cow Back | 19.2 | +4.2 | 48% | 33% | 0% | — | 16 car, 72 yd, 2 TD |
| Christian WatsonWR · Featured Receiver | 16.6 | +5.1 | 87% | 90% | 23% | 42% | 2 car, 12 yd · 5/6, 104 yd |
| D'Andre SwiftRB · Committee Back | 15.6 | +1.7 | 39% | 50% | 21% | 0% | 6 car, 25 yd · 7/7, 61 yd |
| Allen LazardWR · Featured Receiver | 14.1 | +1.7 | 90% | 87% | 23% | 25% | 2 car, 0 yd · 4/6, 41 yd, 1 TD |
| Aaron RodgersQB · Starter QB | 11.2 | −3.0 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 17/27, 205 yd, 1 TD, 1 INT · 3 car, 10 yd |
| Amon-Ra St. BrownWR · Alpha Receiver | 10.9 | −4.5 | 85% | 97% | 27% | 34% | 6/9, 49 yd |
| Kalif RaymondWR · Featured Receiver | 10.6 | +0.2 | 37% | 44% | 18% | 34% | 4/6, 66 yd |
| Jared GoffQB · Starter QB | 9.5 | −3.8 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 23/34, 224 yd · 2 car, 5 yd |
| Aaron JonesRB · Committee Back | 7.8 | −7.7 | 55% | 48% | 15% | 9% | 12 car, 48 yd · 3/4, 20 yd |
| Robert TonyanTE · Rotational Receiver | 5.9 | +1.2 | 62% | 71% | 12% | 11% | 3/3, 29 yd |
| D.J. CharkWR · Rotational Receiver | 4.4 | −1.7 | 65% | 78% | 12% | 13% | 3/4, 14 yd |
| A.J. DillonRB · Committee Back | 3.3 | −9.2 | 52% | 58% | 12% | 2% | 9 car, 33 yd · 0/3, 0 yd |
| Randall CobbWR · Rotational Receiver | 3.1 | +0.3 | 32% | 42% | 8% | 2% | 2/2, 11 yd |
| Josh ReynoldsWR · Rotational Receiver | 2.6 | −0.3 | 40% | 53% | 6% | 14% | 1/2, 16 yd |
| Justin JacksonRB | 2.3 | +0.3 | — | — | — | — | 6 snaps — too few to rate. |
| James MitchellTE · Rotational Receiver | 1.7 | −0.1 | 18% | 8% | 3% | 4% | 1/1, 7 yd |
| Brock WrightTE · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | −1.5 | 58% | 47% | 3% | 5% | 0/1, 0 yd |
| Shane ZylstraTE · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | −1.3 | 35% | 36% | 3% | 2% | 0/1, 0 yd |
| Jameson WilliamsWR · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | −1.7 | 24% | 17% | 3% | 6% | 0/1, 0 yd |
| Tyler DavisTE · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | — | 13% | 10% | 0% | — | No touches. |
| Romeo DoubsWR · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | −3.1 | 38% | 39% | 8% | 10% | 0/2, 0 yd |
1 player 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 Packers attack right, the Lions 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.
(4:34) 12-A.Rodgers pass deep right to 9-C.Watson to DET 14 for 45 yards (24-A.Oruwariye). Penalty on DET-24-A.Oruwariye, Defensive Pass Interference, declined.
Q3 4:34 · Packers · 1st & 10 at GB 41 · gained 45 · +2.79 EP · +16.4% win probability
150 snaps placed · 15 without a recorded yard line, left off the map · 4 marked moments — the largest win-probability swings, one per drive.
Post-game film: 165 plays across 19 drives, personnel groupings on 165 snaps, manual charting on 138. 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.
8 of 19 drives ended in points. The longest march was GB moving 83 yards from the GB 17 for a touchdown. Each bar is the ground a drive actually covered; GB attacks right, DET 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.
165 plays · ranked by the win probability each one moved
165 plays
Bar length is win probability the play moved
Lions0
Packers3How the play was built
No huddle, a man in motion.
Lions3Packers3How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
From outside the pocket, the sack was on the quarterback.
Lions3Packers6Lions3Packers9Lions6Packers9How the play was built
Play action, nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read, from outside the pocket.
Lions12Packers9Lions13Packers9How the play was built
Two in the backfield, play action, nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read, the receiver created it himself.
Lions13Packers15Lions13Packers16Lions19Packers16Lions20Packers16Win 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: Lions at Packers, every play.
Full stat lines
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jared Goff | 23/34 | 224 | 0 | 0 | 1 | +7.5 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jamaal Williams | 16 | 72 | 4.5 | 2 | +2.6 |
| D'Andre Swift | 6 | 25 | 4.2 | 0 | −0.5 |
| Jared Goff |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kalif Raymond | 4 | 6 | 66 | 0 | 18% | +2.8 |
| D'Andre Swift | 7 | 7 | 61 | 0 | 21% |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Isaiah Buggs | 3 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mike Hughes | 5 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Alex Anzalone |
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aaron Rodgers | 17/27 | 205 | 1 | 1 | 2 | −1.3 |
| 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_18_DET_GB
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 -5.5 and lost outright — an upset against the closing number.
Total closed 49; the game landed 36 — under by 13.0.
Conditions and crew
Division game — familiarity tightens these matchups; closing numbers tend to be sharper.
| 2 |
| 5 |
| 2.5 |
| 0 |
| −4.6 |
| Justin Jackson | 1 | 2 | 2.0 | 0 | −0.5 |
| +1.6 |
| Amon-Ra St. Brown | 6 | 9 | 49 | 0 | 27% | +2.1 |
| Josh Reynolds | 1 | 2 | 16 | 0 | 6% | +0.3 |
| D.J. Chark | 3 | 4 | 14 | 0 | 12% | +2.7 |
| Justin Jackson | 1 | 1 | 11 | 0 | 3% | +2.0 |
| James Mitchell | 1 | 1 | 7 | 0 | 3% | +0.7 |
| Shane Zylstra | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3% | −1.4 |
| Brock Wright | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3% | −0.3 |
| Jameson Williams | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3% | −0.9 |
| 1 |
| 5 |
| 0.0 |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| Jerry Jacobs | 5 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kerby Joseph | 5 | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | 2 |
| DeShon Elliott | 3 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| John Cominsky | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Benito Jones | 1 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Malcolm Rodriguez | 1 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Amani Oruwariye | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Aaron Jones | 12 | 48 | 4.0 | 0 | −1.4 |
| A.J. Dillon | 9 | 33 | 3.7 | 0 | +2.2 |
| Christian Watson | 2 | 12 | 6.0 | 0 | +0.6 |
| Aaron Rodgers | 3 | 10 | 3.3 | 0 | −0.8 |
| Allen Lazard | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | −4.0 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Christian Watson | 5 | 6 | 104 | 0 | 23% | +3.9 |
| Allen Lazard | 4 | 6 | 41 | 1 | 23% | +3.9 |
| Robert Tonyan | 3 | 3 | 29 | 0 | 12% | +1.1 |
| Aaron Jones | 3 | 4 | 20 | 0 | 15% | −3.8 |
| Randall Cobb | 2 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 8% | +0.6 |
| A.J. Dillon | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 12% | −2.9 |
| Romeo Doubs | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 8% | −2.7 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Darnell Savage | 7 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 2 |
| De'Vondre Campbell | 4 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Quay Walker | 5 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Adrian Amos | 4 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Rasul Douglas | 3 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Rudy Ford | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jaire Alexander | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Tedarrell Slaton | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jarran Reed | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Krys Barnes | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
