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 18 · Sun, Jan 8, 2023 · Soldier Field
FinalThe verdict · 2022 Week 18
It turned at Q1 11:08, 3rd and 7, on K.J. Osborn — 12.2 win-probability points to the Vikings on one snap, the largest move of the game.
The snaps that bent it
Minnesota Vikings 29–13. Biggest swing: Q1 11:08, Vikings +12.2% win probability on one snap.
The biggest swing of the game · Q1 11:08 · 3rd and 7
K.J. Osborn
Vikings
(11:08) (Shotgun) 8-K.Cousins pass deep left to 17-K.Osborn pushed ob at CHI 4 for 66 yards (37-E.Hicks).
12.2
win-probability points on one snap
The largest move of the game. The two below are drawn against it.
What separated them
Throwing the ball
Vikings won this one — +0.65 expected points per dropback, against Bears at -0.30 expected points per dropback.
Vikingsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Staying on schedule
Vikings won this one — 55% of snaps stayed on schedule, against Bears at 33% of snaps stayed on schedule.
Vikingsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Third down
Vikings won this one — 6 of 11 on third down, against Bears at 2 of 9 on third down.
Vikingsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Explosive plays
Vikings won this one — 10 chunk plays, against Bears at 5 chunk plays.
Vikingsthe 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 9.0 win-probability points apart on the average play, and 29 apart at the widest — with the model the more convinced about Bears.
(11:08) (Shotgun) 8-K.Cousins pass deep left to 17-K.Osborn pushed ob at CHI 4 for 66 yards (37-E.Hicks).
The modelled figures are the league play-by-play model's, not ours.
How the points landed
Adam Thielen's 4-yard touchdown catch with 10:16 left in the 1st put Minnesota Vikings ahead for good. The lead never changed over the 7 scores that followed.
Adam Thielen4-yd TD catch4-yard touchdown catchfrom Kirk Cousins · kick no good, wide rightLead never changed again+66–08 scores · bar length is the lead after each one
Down-to-down truth
Vikingscategory by categoryBears
Vikings ahead 8–0 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, ±0.65 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: Vikings ran 71 snaps at a 48% dropback rate against Bears’s 49 at 63%. Red-zone trips: Vikings 5, Bears 2.
Vikings won the down-to-down efficiency fight: 0.25 expected points added per play vs -0.16.
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.
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.
MIN's play-action rate, 44.1%, was the highest of the 32 team-games charted in week 18 — 0.4 points clear of the next team along.
34 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 10.8 points. · +1.5σ 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 -32 pts to 17 pts
Over Expected room →Vikings-1.2 ptsinside their normal wobble · −3.7 vs their 2.5 pts, and they swing ±5.1 week to week (−0.72× that swing) · 71 snaps
Bears-7.5 ptsinside their normal wobble · +6.4 vs their -13.9 pts, and they swing ±6.7 week to week (+0.96× that swing) · 48 snaps
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 23% to 86%
Tendencies room →Vikings45.0%leaned — ran early · −14.9 vs their 59.9%, and they swing ±9.7 week to week (−1.54× that swing) · 60 early downs
Bears52.8%inside their normal wobble · +8.0 vs their 44.8%, and they swing ±8.2 week to week (+0.97× that swing) · 36 early downs
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 1% to 56%
Tendencies room →Vikings44.1%leaned — faked the run · +15.7 vs their 28.4%, and they swing ±10.8 week to week (+1.46× that swing) · 34 dropbacks
Bears26.7%right on their number · +2.1 vs their 24.5%, and they swing ±8.9 week to week (+0.24× that swing) · 30 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -34% to 108%
Fourth Down room →Vikings—Only 1 fourth-and-short call tonight — too few to read a tendency. Their season number is 36.9%.
Bears—Only 1 fourth-and-short call tonight — too few to read a tendency. Their season number is 37.5%.
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -15% to 54%
Tendencies room →Vikings10.0%leaned — sat back · −9.1 vs their 19.1%, and they swing ±7.8 week to week (−1.16× that swing) · 30 dropbacks
Bears17.6%right on their number · −2.0 vs their 19.7%, and they swing ±13.6 week to week (−0.15× that swing) · 34 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -2% to 26%
Tendencies room →Vikings9.7%right on their number · −2.2 vs their 11.8%, and they swing ±5.6 week to week (−0.39× that swing) · 31 dropbacks
Bears5.9%inside their normal wobble · −2.2 vs their 8.1%, and they swing ±3.4 week to week (−0.65× that swing) · 34 dropbacks
MIN's early-down pass rate was the night's one real departure: 45.0%, 14.9 points below their season mean of 59.9% and 1.5 times their own 9.7-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.
Minnesota Vikings
48 dressed · 7 inactive
Inactive · 7
Chicago Bears
48 dressed · 7 inactive
Inactive · 7
Who moved the needle
Passing · MIN
17/20, 225 yds, 1 TD, 0 INT
16.6 expected points added · +23.3% completion over expected
Passing · MIN
11/13, 116 yds, 0 TD, 1 INT
5.6 expected points added · +16.3% completion over expected
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.
Velus Jones banked 10.2 more points than his own workload asked for.
| Player | Full PPR | Vs expected | Snap share | Routes | Targets | Air yards | Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alexander MattisonRB | 19.0 | +4.9 | 35% | 32% | 3% | 0% | 10 car, 54 yd, 2 TD · 1/1, 6 yd |
| K.J. OsbornWR · Featured Receiver | 16.7 | +6.3 | 77% | 82% | 19% | 40% | 5/6, 117 yd |
| Cole KmetTE · Featured Receiver | 15.7 | +7.0 | 94% | 94% | 19% | 5% | 4/5, 57 yd, 1 TD |
| Velus JonesRB | 14.0 | +10.2 | 20% | 16% | 7% | 15% | 1 car, 42 yd, 1 TD · 1/2, 28 yd |
| Kirk CousinsQB · Starter QB | 13.0 | +1.2 | 54% | — | 0% | — | 17/20, 225 yd, 1 TD |
| Jalen NailorWR · Rotational Receiver | 10.2 | +0.8 | 46% | 41% | 16% | 21% | 4/5, 62 yd |
| Nathan PetermanQB · Starter QB | 9.3 | +1.0 | 75% | — | 0% | — | 11/19, 114 yd, 1 TD · 2 car, 7 yd |
| Adam ThielenWR · Rotational Receiver | 9.2 | +0.1 | 52% | 59% | 9% | 7% | 1 car, 4 yd · 2/3, 8 yd, 1 TD |
| C.J. HamRB · Receiving Back | 8.7 | +2.4 | 21% | 24% | 13% | 8% | 4/4, 47 yd |
| Justin JeffersonWR · Rotational Receiver | 7.8 | −1.0 | 51% | 59% | 16% | 14% | 4/5, 38 yd |
| Khalil HerbertRB · Committee Back | 5.9 | −2.1 | 37% | 29% | 7% | 0% | 10 car, 50 yd · 1/2, -1 yd |
| Chase ClaypoolWR · Featured Receiver | 4.9 | −4.1 | 71% | 74% | 22% | 49% | 2/6, 29 yd |
| Irv SmithTE · Rotational Receiver | 4.4 | −0.1 | 45% | 32% | 9% | 3% | 3/3, 14 yd |
| Jalen ReagorWR · Rotational Receiver | 4.2 | −0.7 | 23% | 26% | 6% | 6% | 1 car, 5 yd · 2/2, 17 yd |
| Dante PettisWR · Featured Receiver | 3.9 | −4.7 | 63% | 77% | 22% | 16% | 2/6, 19 yd |
| Kene NwangwuRB | 3.9 | −0.3 | 14% | 15% | 3% | 0% | 5 car, 13 yd · 1/1, 16 yd |
| Nick MullensQB · Starter QB | 3.4 | −9.4 | 46% | — | 0% | — | 11/13, 116 yd, 1 INT · 4 car, 8 yd |
| Dalvin CookRB | 2.7 | −8.0 | 34% | 38% | 3% | 0% | 11 car, 37 yd · 1/1, 0 yd |
| T.J. HockensonTE · Rotational Receiver | 2.6 | +1.0 | 46% | 50% | 3% | 2% | 1/1, 16 yd |
| David MontgomeryRB | 2.1 | −1.2 | 47% | 52% | 0% | — | 7 car, 21 yd |
| Ty ChandlerRB | 2.0 | −0.8 | 17% | 15% | 0% | — | 6 car, 20 yd |
| N'Keal HarryTE · Rotational Receiver | 1.7 | −2.6 | 33% | 39% | 7% | 15% | 1/2, 7 yd |
| Byron PringleWR · Rotational Receiver | 1.5 | +0.1 | 55% | 48% | 4% | 2% | 1/1, 5 yd |
| Equanimeous St. BrownWR · Rotational Receiver | 1.3 | −0.2 | — | — | — | — | 4 snaps — too few to rate. |
| Trestan EbnerRB | 0.0 | −2.9 | 16% | 19% | 7% | 0% | 0/2, 0 yd |
| Tim BoyleQB | -2.9 | −5.8 | 25% | — | 0% | — | 2/8, 33 yd, 2 INT · 2 car, -2 yd |
1 player played under 8 snaps, so their shares read as a dash rather than a number.
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 Bears attack right, the Vikings 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.
(11:08) (Shotgun) 8-K.Cousins pass deep left to 17-K.Osborn pushed ob at CHI 4 for 66 yards (37-E.Hicks).
Q1 11:08 · Vikings · 3rd & 7 at MIN 30 · gained 66 · +5.95 EP · +17.4% win probability
152 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: 168 plays across 20 drives, personnel groupings on 168 snaps, manual charting on 136. 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 20 drives ended in points. The longest march was CHI moving 75 yards from the CHI 25 for a touchdown. Each bar is the ground a drive actually covered; CHI attacks right, MIN 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.
168 plays · ranked by the win probability each one moved
168 plays
Bar length is win probability the play movedHow the play was built
Nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read.
Vikings6
Bears0How the play was built
Nobody in motion.
Vikings12Bears0Vikings13Bears0Vikings16Bears0Vikings16Bears6Vikings22Bears6Vikings23Bears6Vikings23Bears12Vikings23Bears13Vikings26Bears13Vikings29Bears13Win 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: Vikings at Bears, every play.
Full stat lines
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kirk Cousins | 17/20 | 225 | 1 | 0 | 0 | +16.6 |
| Nick Mullens | 11/13 | 116 | 0 | 1 | 0 | +5.6 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alexander Mattison | 10 | 54 | 5.4 | 2 | +5.9 |
| Dalvin Cook | 11 | 37 | 3.4 | 0 | −6.9 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| K.J. Osborn | 5 | 6 | 117 | 0 | 19% | +9.9 |
| Jalen Nailor | 4 | 5 | 62 | 0 | 16% |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kris Boyd | 4 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Camryn Bynum | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Patrick Jones |
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nathan Peterman | 11/19 | 114 | 1 | 0 | 1 | −3.7 |
| Tim Boyle | 2/8 | 33 | 0 |
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_MIN_CHI
The cards are drawn from the charted play-by-play, not live, and each one says so on its face.
Closing number vs result
Vikings closed -6.5 and covered, winning by 16.
Total closed 42.5; the game landed 42 — under by 0.5.
Conditions and crew
Division game — familiarity tightens these matchups; closing numbers tend to be sharper.
| Ty Chandler | 6 | 20 | 3.3 | 0 | −1.3 |
| Kene Nwangwu | 5 | 13 | 2.6 | 0 | −1.5 |
| Nick Mullens | 4 | 8 | 2.0 | 0 | −0.7 |
| Jalen Reagor | 1 | 5 | 5.0 | 0 | +0.4 |
| Adam Thielen | 1 | 4 | 4.0 | 0 | −0.1 |
| +1.8 |
| C.J. Ham | 4 | 4 | 47 | 0 | 13% | +3.7 |
| Justin Jefferson | 4 | 5 | 38 | 0 | 16% | +1.0 |
| Jalen Reagor | 2 | 2 | 17 | 0 | 6% | +2.9 |
| Kene Nwangwu | 1 | 1 | 16 | 0 | 3% | +1.1 |
| T.J. Hockenson | 1 | 1 | 16 | 0 | 3% | +2.5 |
| Irv Smith | 3 | 3 | 14 | 0 | 9% | +0.0 |
| Adam Thielen | 2 | 3 | 8 | 1 | 9% | +0.3 |
| Alexander Mattison | 1 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 3% | +0.4 |
| Dalvin Cook | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3% | −0.8 |
| 3 |
| 1 |
| 1.0 |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| Duke Shelley | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 1 | 1 |
| Josh Metellus | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 3 |
| Theo Jackson | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Luiji Vilain | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Patrick Peterson | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | 1 |
| William Kwenkeu | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jordan Hicks | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2 |
| 0 |
| −5.5 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Khalil Herbert | 10 | 50 | 5.0 | 0 | +0.5 |
| Velus Jones | 1 | 42 | 42.0 | 1 | +4.2 |
| David Montgomery | 7 | 21 | 3.0 | 0 | −3.0 |
| Nathan Peterman | 2 | 7 | 3.5 | 0 | −0.2 |
| Tim Boyle | 2 | -2 | -1.0 | 0 | +0.0 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cole Kmet | 4 | 5 | 57 | 1 | 19% | +3.7 |
| Chase Claypool | 2 | 6 | 29 | 0 | 22% | −2.4 |
| Velus Jones | 1 | 2 | 28 | 0 | 7% | −0.1 |
| Dante Pettis | 2 | 6 | 19 | 0 | 22% | −4.6 |
| N'Keal Harry | 1 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 7% | +0.7 |
| Byron Pringle | 1 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 4% | −0.4 |
| Equanimeous St. Brown | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 4% | −0.3 |
| Trestan Ebner | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 7% | −1.5 |
| Khalil Herbert | 1 | 2 | -1 | 0 | 7% | −1.7 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Joe Thomas | 9 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jaquan Brisker | 4 | 5 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Harrison Hand | 8 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Elijah Hicks | 3 | 5 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeAndre Houston-Carson | 3 | 5 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Greg Stroman | 3 | 4 | 0.0 | 1 | 1 |
| Trevis Gipson | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Nicholas Morrow | 4 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| A.J. Thomas | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Chase Claypool | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
