The biggest swing of the game · Q1 9:50 · 1st and 10
David Montgomery
Lions
(9:50) 5-D.Montgomery up the middle for 42 yards, TOUCHDOWN.
5.9
win-probability points on one snap
The largest move of the game. The two below are drawn against it.
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 3:44 AM ET · 13 to play · 1 final
Game Center
Game Center
2023 Week 5 · Sun, Oct 8, 2023 · Ford Field
FinalThe verdict · 2023 Week 5
It turned at Q1 9:50, 1st and 10, on David Montgomery — 5.9 win-probability points to the Lions on one snap, the largest move of the game.
The snaps that bent it
Detroit Lions 42–24 — never really in doubt late. Biggest swing: Q1 9:50, Lions +5.9% win probability on one snap.
The biggest swing of the game · Q1 9:50 · 1st and 10
David Montgomery
Lions
(9:50) 5-D.Montgomery up the middle for 42 yards, TOUCHDOWN.
5.9
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 Panthers at 3 giveaways.
Lionsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Running the ball
Lions won this one — +0.32 expected points per carry, against Panthers at -0.22 expected points per carry.
Lionsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Explosive plays
Lions won this one — 9 chunk plays, against Panthers at 4 chunk plays.
Lionsthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Every snap
Lions won this one — +0.25 expected points per snap, against Panthers at -0.08 expected points per snap.
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 6.6 win-probability points apart on the average play, and 27 apart at the widest — with the model the more convinced about Panthers.
(9:50) 5-D.Montgomery up the middle for 42 yards, TOUCHDOWN.
The modelled figures are the league play-by-play model's, not ours.
How the points landed
David Montgomery's 42-yard rushing touchdown with 9:50 left in the 1st put Detroit Lions ahead for good. The lead never changed over the 9 scores that followed.
10 scores · bar length is the lead after each one
Down-to-down truth
Lions ahead 6–2 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: Panthers ran 65 snaps at a 66% dropback rate against Lions’s 57 at 53%. Red-zone trips: Panthers 4, Lions 6.
Lions won the down-to-down efficiency fight: 0.25 expected points added per play vs -0.08.
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.
DET's play-action rate, 46.7%, was the highest of the 28 team-games charted in week 5 — 4.7 points clear of the next team along.
30 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 11.0 points. · +2.0σ from their own normal
CAR's blitz rate sent, 50.0%, was the highest of the 28 team-games charted in week 5 — 3.3 points clear of the next team along.
30 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 12.0 points. · +1.6σ from their own normal
CAR's play-action rate turned over: 5.1% in week 4 against 20.9% here — they dropped back clean then and faked the run now, a turn of 2.0 of their own weekly swings across the two.
43 dropbacks this game, floor 12 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 7.7 points. · +1.0σ 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 -27 pts to 18 pts
Over Expected room →inside their normal wobble · +4.9 vs their -5.5 pts, and they swing ±8.6 week to week (+0.58× that swing) · 65 snaps
right on their number · +3.7 vs their -3.9 pts, and they swing ±8.4 week to week (+0.43× that swing) · 57 snaps
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 26% to 83%
Tendencies room →inside their normal wobble · +6.1 vs their 55.0%, and they swing ±11.0 week to week (+0.56× that swing) · 54 early downs
right on their number · −2.7 vs their 52.7%, and they swing ±10.5 week to week (−0.26× that swing) · 46 early downs
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -8% to 53%
Tendencies room →inside their normal wobble · +7.4 vs their 13.6%, and they swing ±7.7 week to week (+0.95× that swing) · 43 dropbacks
off script — faked the run · +22.0 vs their 24.7%, and they swing ±11.0 week to week (+2.00× that swing) · 30 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -4% to 111%
Fourth Down room →Only 1 fourth-and-short call tonight — too few to read a tendency. Their season number is 52.9%.
Only 2 fourth-and-short calls tonight — too few to read a tendency. Their season number is 59.4%.
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 0% to 62%
Tendencies room →leaned — sent pressure · +19.1 vs their 30.9%, and they swing ±12.0 week to week (+1.59× that swing) · 30 dropbacks
right on their number · −0.5 vs their 35.4%, and they swing ±10.3 week to week (−0.05× that swing) · 43 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -4% to 39%
Tendencies room →leaned — got home · +9.1 vs their 14.2%, and they swing ±6.5 week to week (+1.42× that swing) · 30 dropbacks
right on their number · −3.6 vs their 17.5%, and they swing ±8.6 week to week (−0.42× that swing) · 43 dropbacks
DET's play-action rate was the night's one real departure: 46.7%, 22.0 points above their season mean of 24.7% and 2.0 times their own 11.0-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.
Carolina Panthers
48 dressed · 5 inactive · 1 never used
Inactive · 5
Dressed, never took a snap · 1
Detroit Lions
48 dressed · 6 inactive · 1 never used
Inactive · 6
Dressed, never took a snap · 1
Who moved the needle
Passing · CAR
25/41, 247 yds, 3 TD, 2 INT
-0.0 expected points added · +2.2% completion over expected
Passing · DET
20/28, 236 yds, 3 TD, 0 INT
5.8 expected points added · +3.1% completion over expected
Receiving · CAR
11/13 for 107 yds, 1 TD
37% of team targets · 10.9 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.
Sam LaPorta banked 9.7 more points than his own workload asked for.
| Player | Full PPR | Vs expected | Snap share | Routes | Targets | Air yards | Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adam ThielenWR · Alpha Receiver | 27.7 | +4.5 | 97% | 95% | 37% | 36% | 11/13, 107 yd, 1 TD |
| Jared GoffQB · Starter QB | 27.4 | +8.0 | 95% | — | 0% | — | 20/28, 236 yd, 3 TD · 2 car, 0 yd, 1 TD |
| David MontgomeryRB · Bell Cow Back | 20.9 | −7.2 | 75% | 83% | 22% | 2% | 19 car, 109 yd, 1 TD · 2/6, 20 yd |
| Sam LaPortaTE · Rotational Receiver | 19.7 | +9.7 | 87% | 93% | 15% | 26% | 3/4, 47 yd, 2 TD |
| Bryce YoungQB · Starter QB | 18.3 | −3.3 | 99% | — | 0% | — | 25/41, 247 yd, 3 TD, 2 INT · 1 car, 4 yd |
| Josh ReynoldsWR · Featured Receiver | 17.6 | +5.3 | 47% | 47% | 19% | 39% | 4/5, 76 yd, 1 TD |
| D.J. CharkWR · Rotational Receiver | 13.2 | +2.0 | 99% | 100% | 17% | 31% | 3/6, 42 yd, 1 TD |
| Craig ReynoldsRB | 11.2 | +4.8 | 22% | 10% | 0% | — | 7 car, 52 yd, 1 TD |
| Jonathan MingoWR · Featured Receiver | 9.8 | −1.8 | 86% | 84% | 20% | 23% | 5/7, 48 yd |
| Kalif RaymondWR · Rotational Receiver | 7.5 | +1.4 | 48% | 60% | 11% | 17% | 3/3, 45 yd |
| Tommy TrembleTE · Rotational Receiver | 7.1 | +3.5 | 20% | 19% | 3% | 0% | 1/1, 1 yd, 1 TD |
| Hayden HurstTE · Rotational Receiver | 5.1 | +0.7 | 59% | 63% | 9% | 6% | 3/3, 21 yd |
| Brock WrightTE · Rotational Receiver | 4.6 | −0.8 | 62% | 53% | 11% | 7% | 3/3, 16 yd |
| Chuba HubbardRB | 4.5 | −2.8 | 48% | 44% | 6% | 0% | 9 car, 35 yd · 1/2, 0 yd |
| Marvin JonesWR · Rotational Receiver | 4.2 | +0.7 | 58% | 60% | 7% | 10% | 2/2, 22 yd |
| Ian ThomasTE · Rotational Receiver | 3.8 | +0.7 | 21% | 23% | 6% | 7% | 1/2, 28 yd |
| Laviska Shenault Jr.WR · Rotational Receiver | 2.7 | −1.8 | 24% | 19% | 0% | — | 5 car, 27 yd |
| Jameson WilliamsWR · Rotational Receiver | 2.2 | −2.5 | 47% | 50% | 11% | 2% | 2/3, 2 yd |
| Zonovan KnightRB | 1.8 | +0.1 | — | — | — | — | No snap count on file, so his shares read as a dash. |
| Miles SandersRB | 1.2 | −3.3 | 46% | 53% | 3% | 0% | 7 car, 32 yd · 0/1, 0 yd |
| Andy DaltonQB | 0.1 | −0.2 | — | — | — | — | 1 snap — too few to rate. |
| Ihmir Smith-MarsetteWR | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | Did not take a snap. |
| Darrell DanielsTE · Rotational Receiver | 0.0 | — | 25% | 13% | 0% | — | No touches. |
| Teddy BridgewaterQB | -0.2 | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | 3 snaps — too few to rate. |
4 players played under 8 snaps, so their shares read as a dash rather than a number. 2 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 Lions attack right, the Panthers 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.
(9:50) 5-D.Montgomery up the middle for 42 yards, TOUCHDOWN.
Q1 9:50 · Lions · 1st & 10 at CAR 42 · gained 42 · +3.53 EP · +10.4% win probability
164 snaps placed · 7 without a recorded yard line, left off the map · 4 marked moments — the largest win-probability swings, one per drive.
Post-game film: 171 plays across 21 drives, personnel groupings on 164 snaps, the eleven on the field by name, manual charting on 166. 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.
10 of 21 drives ended in points. The longest march was DET moving 81 yards from the DET 19 for a touchdown. Each bar is the ground a drive actually covered; DET attacks right, CAR 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. Open any play above to see the eleven men who were actually on the field for it.
171 plays · ranked by the win probability each one moved
171 plays
How the play was built
Two in the backfield, nobody in motion.
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: Panthers at Lions, every play.
Full stat lines
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bryce Young | 25/41 | 247 | 3 | 2 | 1 | −0.0 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chuba Hubbard | 9 | 35 | 3.9 | 0 | −0.8 |
| Miles Sanders | 7 | 32 | 4.6 | 0 | −5.5 |
| Laviska Shenault Jr. |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adam Thielen | 11 | 13 | 107 | 1 | 37% | +10.9 |
| Jonathan Mingo | 5 | 7 | 48 | 0 | 20% |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vonn Bell | 4 | 5 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Sam Franklin | 5 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Derrick Brown |
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jared Goff | 20/28 | 236 | 3 | 0 | 2 | +5.8 |
| 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/2023_05_CAR_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
Lions closed -9.5 and covered, winning by 18.
Total closed 43.5; the game landed 66 — over by 22.5.
Conditions and crew
| 5 |
| 27 |
| 5.4 |
| 0 |
| +1.0 |
| Bryce Young | 1 | 4 | 4.0 | 0 | −0.2 |
| Andy Dalton | 1 | 1 | 1.0 | 0 | +0.4 |
| −2.1 |
| D.J. Chark | 3 | 6 | 42 | 1 | 17% | +3.4 |
| Ian Thomas | 1 | 2 | 28 | 0 | 6% | −4.5 |
| Hayden Hurst | 3 | 3 | 21 | 0 | 9% | +0.4 |
| Tommy Tremble | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3% | +1.1 |
| Chuba Hubbard | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 6% | −1.0 |
| Miles Sanders | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3% | −0.9 |
| 2 |
| 4 |
| 0.0 |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| Frankie Luvu | 2 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| C.J. Henderson | 3 | 2 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Shy Tuttle | 1 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Brian Burns | 2 | 1 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Troy Hill | 1 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jeremy Chinn | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| D'Shawn Jamison | 1 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| David Montgomery | 19 | 109 | 5.7 | 1 | +4.6 |
| Craig Reynolds | 7 | 52 | 7.4 | 1 | +3.4 |
| Jared Goff | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | +0.7 |
| Teddy Bridgewater | 2 | -2 | -1.0 | 0 | −2.7 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Josh Reynolds | 4 | 5 | 76 | 1 | 19% | +5.5 |
| Sam LaPorta | 3 | 4 | 47 | 2 | 15% | +6.0 |
| Kalif Raymond | 3 | 3 | 45 | 0 | 11% | +3.5 |
| Marvin Jones | 2 | 2 | 22 | 0 | 7% | +1.0 |
| David Montgomery | 2 | 6 | 20 | 0 | 22% | −2.8 |
| Brock Wright | 3 | 3 | 16 | 0 | 11% | +0.3 |
| Zonovan Knight | 1 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 4% | +0.6 |
| Jameson Williams | 2 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 11% | −2.6 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alex Anzalone | 7 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Will Harris | 6 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Derrick Barnes | 2 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kerby Joseph | 4 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Tracy Walker III | 3 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Cameron Sutton | 2 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Alim McNeill | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jerry Jacobs | 3 | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | 1 |
| Aidan Hutchinson | 3 | 0 | 1.0 | 1 | 1 |
| Jack Campbell | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |