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
2024 Week 18 · Sun, Jan 5, 2025 · Allegiant Stadium
FinalThe verdict · 2024 Week 18
It turned at Q2 0:44, 2nd and 5, on Daiyan Henley — 14.8 win-probability points to the Chargers on one snap, the largest move of the game.
The snaps that bent it
Los Angeles Chargers 34–20. Biggest swing: Q2 0:44, Chargers +14.8% win probability on one snap.
The biggest swing of the game · Q2 0:44 · 2nd and 5
Daiyan Henley
Chargers
(:44) (No Huddle, Shotgun) 12-A.O'Connell pass short right intended for 22-A.Mattison INTERCEPTED by 0-D.Henley at LV 34. 0-D.Henley to LV 30 for 4 yards (22-A.Mattison).
14.8
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
Chargers won this one — +0.57 expected points per dropback, against Raiders at -0.08 expected points per dropback.
Chargersthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Third down
Chargers won this one — 7 of 14 on third down, against Raiders at 2 of 9 on third down.
Chargersthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Every snap
Chargers won this one — +0.29 expected points per snap, against Raiders at -0.10 expected points per snap.
Chargersthe gap went the way the scoreboard did
Staying on schedule
Chargers won this one — 55% of snaps stayed on schedule, against Raiders at 43% of snaps stayed on schedule.
Chargersthe 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 17.1 win-probability points apart on the average play, and 34 apart at the widest — with the model the more convinced about Raiders.
(:44) (No Huddle, Shotgun) 12-A.O'Connell pass short right intended for 22-A.Mattison INTERCEPTED by 0-D.Henley at LV 34. 0-D.Henley to LV 30 for 4 yards (22-A.Mattison).
The modelled figures are the league play-by-play model's, not ours.
How the points landed
D.J. Chark's 6-yard touchdown catch with 0:14 left in the 2nd put Los Angeles Chargers ahead for good. The lead never changed over the 5 scores that followed.
D.J. Chark6-yd TD catch6-yard touchdown catchfrom Justin Herbert · two-point goodLead never changed again+817–1011 scores · bar length is the lead after each one
Down-to-down truth
Chargerscategory by categoryRaiders
Chargers ahead 8–1 on categories, but the biggest gap belongs to Raiders, in 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, ±0.57 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: Chargers ran 71 snaps at a 54% dropback rate against Raiders’s 47 at 79%. Red-zone trips: Chargers 6, Raiders 3.
Chargers won the down-to-down efficiency fight: 0.29 expected points added per play vs -0.10.
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.
2 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.
LV's pass rate over expected turned over: −6.6 pts in week 17 against +7.4 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.
47 snaps this game, floor 20 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 6.4 points. · +1.3σ from their own normal
LV's early-down pass rate turned over: 42.6% in week 17 against 72.2% here — they ran early then and passed early now, a turn of 2.7 of their own weekly swings across the two.
36 early downs this game, floor 15 — 17 of their games behind the ruler, and their own week-to-week swing is 10.8 points. · +0.9σ 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 -19 pts to 16 pts
Over Expected room →Chargers-1.6 ptsright on their number · −0.0 vs their -1.6 pts, and they swing ±6.7 week to week (−0.00× that swing) · 70 snaps
Raiders7.4 ptsleaned — threw more than the situation asked · +8.2 vs their -0.9 pts, and they swing ±6.4 week to week (+1.29× that swing) · 47 snaps
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale 25% to 91%
Tendencies room →Chargers56.4%right on their number · +1.1 vs their 55.2%, and they swing ±11.6 week to week (+0.10× that swing) · 55 early downs
Raiders72.2%inside their normal wobble · +9.4 vs their 62.8%, and they swing ±10.8 week to week (+0.87× that swing) · 36 early downs
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -6% to 63%
Tendencies room →Chargers26.3%right on their number · −4.4 vs their 30.7%, and they swing ±12.3 week to week (−0.36× that swing) · 38 dropbacks
Raiders18.9%right on their number · −0.8 vs their 19.7%, and they swing ±9.7 week to week (−0.08× that swing) · 37 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -32% to 94%
Fourth Down room →Chargers20.0%right on their number · +2.1 vs their 17.9%, and they swing ±16.0 week to week (+0.13× that swing) · 5 fourth-and-short calls
Raiders0.0%leaned — took the kick · −31.1 vs their 31.1%, and they swing ±24.6 week to week (−1.26× that swing) · 3 fourth-and-short calls
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -2% to 67%
Tendencies room →Chargers21.6%right on their number · −3.2 vs their 24.8%, and they swing ±10.2 week to week (−0.32× that swing) · 37 dropbacks
Raiders23.7%inside their normal wobble · −9.4 vs their 33.1%, and they swing ±13.1 week to week (−0.72× that swing) · 38 dropbacks
upper band = their week-to-week swing · lower rule = all 32 teams · scale -4% to 32%
Tendencies room →Chargers13.5%right on their number · −0.6 vs their 14.1%, and they swing ±7.0 week to week (−0.08× that swing) · 37 dropbacks
Raiders7.9%inside their normal wobble · −4.6 vs their 12.5%, and they swing ±6.1 week to week (−0.76× that swing) · 38 dropbacks
LV's pass rate over expected was the night's one real departure: 7.4 pts, 8.2 points above their season mean of -0.9 pts and 1.3 times their own 6.4-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.
Los Angeles Chargers
48 dressed · 7 inactive · 1 never used
Inactive · 7
Dressed, never took a snap · 1
Las Vegas Raiders
48 dressed · 6 inactive · 3 never used
Inactive · 6
Dressed, never took a snap · 3
Who moved the needle
Passing · LAC
28/36, 346 yds, 2 TD, 0 INT
17.7 expected points added · +10.0% completion over expected
Passing · LV
24/34, 214 yds, 2 TD, 1 INT
-3.9 expected points added · +4.4% completion over expected
Receiving · LAC
13/14 for 186 yds, 0 TD
40% of team targets · 12.3 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.
Jakobi Meyers banked 9.7 more points than his own workload asked for.
| Player | Full PPR | Vs expected | Snap share | Routes | Targets | Air yards | Line |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quentin JohnstonWR · Alpha Receiver | 31.6 | +8.3 | 73% | 90% | 40% | 50% | 13/14, 186 yd |
| Justin HerbertQB · Starter QB | 28.0 | +7.2 | 100% | — | 0% | — | 28/36, 346 yd, 2 TD · 4 car, 42 yd |
| Jakobi MeyersWR · Alpha Receiver | 27.3 | +9.7 | 94% | 100% | 29% | 43% | 9/10, 123 yd, 1 TD |
| Ladd McConkeyWR · Featured Receiver | 16.5 | +0.1 | 68% | 85% | 23% | 26% | 5/8, 95 yd |
| Aidan O'ConnellQB · Starter QB | 15.9 | +1.5 | 94% | — | 0% | — | 24/34, 214 yd, 2 TD, 1 INT · 4 car, 13 yd |
| Will DisslyTE · Rotational Receiver | 15.2 | +4.4 | 57% | 67% | 17% | 7% | 5/6, 42 yd, 1 TD |
| Brock BowersTE · Alpha Receiver | 15.0 | −1.4 | 94% | 100% | 26% | 34% | 4/9, 50 yd, 1 TD |
| J.K. DobbinsRB · Committee Back | 10.5 | −11.2 | 65% | 64% | 9% | 0% | 18 car, 63 yd · 3/3, 12 yd |
| Hassan HaskinsRB | 9.3 | −5.2 | 36% | 31% | 0% | — | 12 car, 33 yd, 1 TD |
| D.J. CharkWR · Rotational Receiver | 7.6 | −1.7 | 49% | 51% | 9% | 18% | 1/3, 6 yd, 1 TD |
| Alexander MattisonRB · Committee Back | 7.1 | −2.5 | 73% | 73% | 15% | 1% | 6 car, 20 yd · 4/5, 11 yd |
| Michael MayerTE · Rotational Receiver | 6.1 | +0.6 | 80% | 76% | 12% | 3% | 4/4, 21 yd |
| Tre TuckerWR · Rotational Receiver | 5.4 | −0.6 | 80% | 78% | 12% | 20% | 3/4, 24 yd |
| Derius DavisWR · Rotational Receiver | 1.4 | −1.7 | 31% | 23% | 3% | 1% | 1 car, -1 yd · 1/1, 5 yd |
| Chris CollierRB | 1.2 | −2.5 | 25% | 24% | 6% | 0% | 2 car, 6 yd · 1/2, -4 yd |
| Desmond RidderQB | 0.4 | −0.9 | — | — | — | — | 3 snaps — too few to rate. |
| Scott MatlockRB | 0.0 | — | 37% | 23% | 0% | — | No touches. |
| Dylan LaubeRB | 0.0 | — | — | — | — | — | 1 snap — too few to rate. |
2 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 Raiders attack right, the Chargers 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.
(:44) (No Huddle, Shotgun) 12-A.O'Connell pass short right intended for 22-A.Mattison INTERCEPTED by 0-D.Henley at LV 34. 0-D.Henley to LV 30 for 4 yards (22-A.Mattison).
Q2 0:44 · Raiders · 2nd & 5 at LV 31 · gained nothing · -4.09 EP · −20.2% win probability
158 snaps placed · 14 without a recorded yard line, left off the map · 4 marked moments — the largest win-probability swings, one per drive.
Post-game film: 172 plays across 20 drives, personnel groupings on 158 snaps, the eleven on the field by name, manual charting on 167. 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.
11 of 20 drives ended in points. The longest march was LAC moving 81 yards from the LAC 19 for a touchdown. Each bar is the ground a drive actually covered; LV attacks right, LAC 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.
172 plays · ranked by the win probability each one moved
172 plays
Bar length is win probability the play moved
Chargers0
Raiders3How the play was built
No huddle, nobody in motion.
Thrown on the first read.
Chargers3Raiders3Chargers3Raiders9Chargers3Raiders10Chargers6Raiders10Chargers9Raiders10How the play was built
No huddle, nobody in motion.
Thrown as a checkdown, it should have been intercepted.
Chargers15Raiders10Chargers17Raiders10Chargers20Raiders10Chargers20Raiders13Chargers26Raiders13Chargers27Raiders13Chargers33Raiders13Chargers34Raiders13Chargers34Raiders19Chargers34Raiders20Win 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: Chargers at Raiders, every play.
Full stat lines
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Justin Herbert | 28/36 | 346 | 2 | 0 | 1 | +17.7 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| J.K. Dobbins | 18 | 63 | 3.5 | 0 | −2.4 |
| Justin Herbert | 4 | 42 | 10.5 | 0 | +1.7 |
| Hassan Haskins |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quentin Johnston | 13 | 14 | 186 | 0 | 40% | +12.3 |
| Ladd McConkey | 5 | 8 | 95 | 0 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Troy Dye | 4 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Tarheeb Still | 4 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Daiyan Henley |
| Player | C/Att | Yds | TD | INT | Sacked | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aidan O'Connell | 24/34 | 214 | 2 | 1 | 0 | −3.9 |
| Desmond Ridder | 1/2 | 11 | 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/2024_18_LAC_LV
The cards are drawn from the charted play-by-play, not live, and each one says so on its face.
Closing number vs result
Chargers closed -7 and covered, winning by 14.
Total closed 42.5; the game landed 54 — over by 11.5.
Conditions and crew
Division game — familiarity tightens these matchups; closing numbers tend to be sharper.
| 12 |
| 33 |
| 2.8 |
| 1 |
| +1.3 |
| Derius Davis | 1 | -1 | -1.0 | 0 | −0.7 |
| 23% |
| +5.5 |
| Will Dissly | 5 | 6 | 42 | 1 | 17% | +3.1 |
| J.K. Dobbins | 3 | 3 | 12 | 0 | 9% | −0.8 |
| D.J. Chark | 1 | 3 | 6 | 1 | 9% | +1.3 |
| Derius Davis | 1 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 3% | +0.6 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 0.0 |
| 1 |
| 1 |
| Alohi Gilman | 3 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Cam Hart | 3 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Derwin James | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Tony Jefferson | 2 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kristian Fulton | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Teair Tart | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Cameron Dicker | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| +0.3 |
| Player | Att | Yds | Avg | TD | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alexander Mattison | 6 | 20 | 3.3 | 0 | −1.6 |
| Aidan O'Connell | 4 | 13 | 3.3 | 0 | +0.6 |
| Chris Collier | 2 | 6 | 3.0 | 0 | −0.3 |
| Player | Rec | Tgt | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jakobi Meyers | 9 | 10 | 123 | 1 | 29% | +4.6 |
| Brock Bowers | 4 | 9 | 50 | 1 | 26% | −2.1 |
| Tre Tucker | 3 | 4 | 24 | 0 | 12% | +1.9 |
| Michael Mayer | 4 | 4 | 21 | 0 | 12% | +0.1 |
| Alexander Mattison | 4 | 5 | 11 | 0 | 15% | −5.3 |
| Chris Collier | 1 | 2 | -4 | 0 | 6% | −1.6 |
| Player | Solo | Ast | Sacks | INT | PD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Robert Spillane | 6 | 10 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Decamerion Richardson | 5 | 5 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Isaiah Pola-Mao | 5 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Trevon Moehrig | 2 | 5 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Divine Deablo | 2 | 5 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jonah Laulu | 1 | 5 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jack Jones | 3 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| Zach Carter | 1 | 4 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 |
| John Jenkins | 1 | 3 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 |
| Adam Butler | 3 | 1 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 |
