NFL · 2026 Week 6
2026 Week 6 Full PPR QB Rankings
Final pre-kickoff board · published October 15, 2026, 21:56 UTC · first kickoff October 16, 2026, 00:15 UTC
Full PPR, 1QB · 28 players projected · updated October 15, 2026
How these rankings work
How these rankings are built
We start with preseason player projections and draft position — where players were being selected in fantasy drafts entering the season.
We then update those expectations for Week 6 using recent usage, availability and market signals. Market signals are current sportsbook and prediction-market prices that can reflect changing expectations for a player's workload, performance, or availability.
We then simulate the week 4,000 times and rank players by the projected fantasy points those simulations produce.
This board is priced in Full PPR. The order and the finish percentages below are specific to it: another format is a separate simulation of the same projections, not this table with new points.
What the percentages mean
For every simulation, we also record where each player finishes at his position.
- Top 3
- how often he finishes among the top three at his position
- Top 12
- how often he finishes in the top 12
- Top 24
- how often he finishes in the top 24
A WR with a 58% Top 12 rate finished as a top-12 WR in 58% of the simulated weeks.
How often a strong start lasts
Since 1999, 67% of QBs inside the top 12 through Week 5 finished the season inside the top 12. Measured over 324 QB-seasons from 1999-2025, in the same scoring rule as this board.
What stood out in Week 6
28 QBs ranked for Week 6. Josh Allen leads at 20.3 projected points.
Tier break
1.5 projected points separate QB3 Matthew Stafford from QB4 Drake Maye.
Biggest differences from the draft market
Ahead
- Tanner McKeeQB27Sportsbooks pricing him above our baselineTop 3: 4% · Top 12: 20% · Top 24: 65% +41 vs. QB68
- Tyson BagentQB28Recent usage above his season baselineTop 3: 2% · Top 12: 14% · Top 24: 59% +17 vs. QB45
Behind
- Justin HerbertQB23Sportsbooks pricing him below our baselineTop 3: 3% · Top 12: 27% · Top 24: 80% -7 vs. QB16
Movement
Risers
- Jameis WinstonQB17Top 3: 10% · Top 12: 41% · Top 24: 84% ↑ 12
- Jordan LoveQB5Top 3: 15% · Top 12: 55% · Top 24: 90% ↑ 10
- Kirk CousinsQB9Top 3: 13% · Top 12: 51% · Top 24: 89% ↑ 8
Fallers
- Dak PrescottQB7Top 3: 13% · Top 12: 54% · Top 24: 91% ↓ 4
- Deshaun WatsonQB15Top 3: 11% · Top 12: 45% · Top 24: 87% ↓ 4
- Tyson BagentQB28Top 3: 2% · Top 12: 14% · Top 24: 59% ↓ 4
Positional movement since the final Week 5 board, among players inside QB30 either week. Players not ranked at their position then are excluded.
| # | Pos | Player | Pos rank | Proj | Outcome profile | Move |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | QB | Josh AllenBUF Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 25% of the time, 4th to 12th 40%, 13th to 24th 27%, and outside the top 24 8%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB9 at the median, QB4 - QB16 in the middle half, and QB1 - QB23 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 25%Top 12: 65%Top 24: 92% |
QB1↑ 1 | 20.3 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 25% of the time, 4th to 12th 40%, 13th to 24th 27%, and outside the top 24 8%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB9 at the median, QB4 - QB16 in the middle half, and QB1 - QB23 in the middle 80%. | |
| 2 | QB | Brock PurdySF Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 22% of the time, 4th to 12th 40%, 13th to 24th 29%, and outside the top 24 9%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB9 at the median, QB4 - QB17 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB24 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 22%Top 12: 62%Top 24: 91% |
QB2↑ 3 | 19.2 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 22% of the time, 4th to 12th 40%, 13th to 24th 29%, and outside the top 24 9%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB9 at the median, QB4 - QB17 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB24 in the middle 80%. | |
| 3 | QB | Matthew StaffordLAR Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 20% of the time, 4th to 12th 42%, 13th to 24th 30%, and outside the top 24 8%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB9 at the median, QB4 - QB17 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB23 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 20%Top 12: 62%Top 24: 92% |
QB3↑ 1 | 19.0 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 20% of the time, 4th to 12th 42%, 13th to 24th 30%, and outside the top 24 8%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB9 at the median, QB4 - QB17 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB23 in the middle 80%. | |
| 4 | QB | Drake MayeNE Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 16% of the time, 4th to 12th 38%, 13th to 24th 36%, and outside the top 24 9%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB11 at the median, QB6 - QB18 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB24 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 16%Top 12: 54%Top 24: 91% |
QB4↑ 5 | 17.5 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 16% of the time, 4th to 12th 38%, 13th to 24th 36%, and outside the top 24 9%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB11 at the median, QB6 - QB18 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB24 in the middle 80%. | |
| 5 | QB | Jordan LoveGB Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 15% of the time, 4th to 12th 39%, 13th to 24th 35%, and outside the top 24 10%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB11 at the median, QB6 - QB18 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 15%Top 12: 55%Top 24: 90% |
QB5↑ 10 | 17.4 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 15% of the time, 4th to 12th 39%, 13th to 24th 35%, and outside the top 24 10%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB11 at the median, QB6 - QB18 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%. | |
| 6 | QB | Jayden DanielsWAS Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 16% of the time, 4th to 12th 34%, 13th to 24th 37%, and outside the top 24 12%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 16%Top 12: 50%Top 24: 88% |
QB6↑ 1 | 17.1 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 16% of the time, 4th to 12th 34%, 13th to 24th 37%, and outside the top 24 12%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB25 in the middle 80%. | |
| 7 | QB | Dak PrescottDAL Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 13% of the time, 4th to 12th 41%, 13th to 24th 37%, and outside the top 24 9%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB18 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB24 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 13%Top 12: 54%Top 24: 91% |
QB7↓ 4 | 17.1 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 13% of the time, 4th to 12th 41%, 13th to 24th 37%, and outside the top 24 9%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB18 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB24 in the middle 80%. | |
| 8 | QB | Bryce YoungCAR Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 14% of the time, 4th to 12th 38%, 13th to 24th 37%, and outside the top 24 12%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 14%Top 12: 51%Top 24: 89% |
QB8NEW | 16.8 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 14% of the time, 4th to 12th 38%, 13th to 24th 37%, and outside the top 24 12%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%. | |
| 9 | QB | Kirk CousinsLV Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 13% of the time, 4th to 12th 37%, 13th to 24th 38%, and outside the top 24 11%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 13%Top 12: 51%Top 24: 89% |
QB9↑ 8 | 16.6 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 13% of the time, 4th to 12th 37%, 13th to 24th 38%, and outside the top 24 11%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%. | |
| 10 | QB | Patrick MahomesKC Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 13% of the time, 4th to 12th 37%, 13th to 24th 37%, and outside the top 24 13%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB13 at the median, QB6 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 13%Top 12: 50%Top 24: 87% |
QB10NEW | 16.4 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 13% of the time, 4th to 12th 37%, 13th to 24th 37%, and outside the top 24 13%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB13 at the median, QB6 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB26 in the middle 80%. | |
| 11 | QB | Tyler ShoughNO Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 11% of the time, 4th to 12th 37%, 13th to 24th 41%, and outside the top 24 12%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB13 at the median, QB7 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 11%Top 12: 48%Top 24: 88% |
QB11↓ 3 | 16.0 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 11% of the time, 4th to 12th 37%, 13th to 24th 41%, and outside the top 24 12%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB13 at the median, QB7 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%. | |
| 12 | QB | Jacoby BrissettARI Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 11% of the time, 4th to 12th 35%, 13th to 24th 42%, and outside the top 24 12%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB14 at the median, QB7 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 11%Top 12: 46%Top 24: 88% |
QB12↓ 2 | 15.7 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 11% of the time, 4th to 12th 35%, 13th to 24th 42%, and outside the top 24 12%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB14 at the median, QB7 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%. | |
| 13 | QB | Trevor LawrenceJAX Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 11% of the time, 4th to 12th 34%, 13th to 24th 43%, and outside the top 24 13%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB14 at the median, QB7 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 11%Top 12: 45%Top 24: 87% |
QB13— | 15.6 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 11% of the time, 4th to 12th 34%, 13th to 24th 43%, and outside the top 24 13%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB14 at the median, QB7 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%. | |
| 14 | QB | C.J. StroudHOU Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 10% of the time, 4th to 12th 35%, 13th to 24th 43%, and outside the top 24 12%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB14 at the median, QB7 - QB21 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 10%Top 12: 45%Top 24: 88% |
QB14— | 15.5 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 10% of the time, 4th to 12th 35%, 13th to 24th 43%, and outside the top 24 12%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB14 at the median, QB7 - QB21 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB25 in the middle 80%. | |
| 15 | QB | Deshaun WatsonCLE Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 11% of the time, 4th to 12th 34%, 13th to 24th 42%, and outside the top 24 13%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB14 at the median, QB7 - QB21 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 11%Top 12: 45%Top 24: 87% |
QB15↓ 4 | 15.5 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 11% of the time, 4th to 12th 34%, 13th to 24th 42%, and outside the top 24 13%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB14 at the median, QB7 - QB21 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB26 in the middle 80%. | |
| 16 | QB | Aaron RodgersPIT Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 10% of the time, 4th to 12th 33%, 13th to 24th 43%, and outside the top 24 14%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB14 at the median, QB8 - QB21 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 10%Top 12: 43%Top 24: 86% |
QB16↑ 3 | 15.2 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 10% of the time, 4th to 12th 33%, 13th to 24th 43%, and outside the top 24 14%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB14 at the median, QB8 - QB21 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB26 in the middle 80%. | |
| 17 | QB | Jameis WinstonNYG Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 10% of the time, 4th to 12th 31%, 13th to 24th 43%, and outside the top 24 16%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB15 at the median, QB8 - QB22 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 10%Top 12: 41%Top 24: 84% |
QB17↑ 12 | 14.7 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 10% of the time, 4th to 12th 31%, 13th to 24th 43%, and outside the top 24 16%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB15 at the median, QB8 - QB22 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB26 in the middle 80%. | |
| 18 | QB | Michael Penix Jr.ATL Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 9% of the time, 4th to 12th 29%, 13th to 24th 46%, and outside the top 24 17%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB16 at the median, QB9 - QB22 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB27 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 9%Top 12: 38%Top 24: 83% |
QB18↑ 7 | 14.3 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 9% of the time, 4th to 12th 29%, 13th to 24th 46%, and outside the top 24 17%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB16 at the median, QB9 - QB22 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB27 in the middle 80%. | |
| 19 | QB | Bo NixDEN Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 6% of the time, 4th to 12th 30%, 13th to 24th 47%, and outside the top 24 17%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB16 at the median, QB9 - QB22 in the middle half, and QB5 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 6%Top 12: 36%Top 24: 83% |
QB19↓ 3 | 13.8 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 6% of the time, 4th to 12th 30%, 13th to 24th 47%, and outside the top 24 17%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB16 at the median, QB9 - QB22 in the middle half, and QB5 - QB26 in the middle 80%. | |
| 20 | QB | Daniel JonesIND Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 5% of the time, 4th to 12th 30%, 13th to 24th 49%, and outside the top 24 16%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB16 at the median, QB10 - QB22 in the middle half, and QB5 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 5%Top 12: 35%Top 24: 84% |
QB20↑ 6 | 13.7 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 5% of the time, 4th to 12th 30%, 13th to 24th 49%, and outside the top 24 16%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB16 at the median, QB10 - QB22 in the middle half, and QB5 - QB26 in the middle 80%. | |
| 21 | QB | Sam DarnoldSEA Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 7% of the time, 4th to 12th 28%, 13th to 24th 46%, and outside the top 24 19%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB17 at the median, QB9 - QB23 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB27 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 7%Top 12: 35%Top 24: 81% |
QB21↓ 1 | 13.7 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 7% of the time, 4th to 12th 28%, 13th to 24th 46%, and outside the top 24 19%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB17 at the median, QB9 - QB23 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB27 in the middle 80%. | |
| 22 | QB | Geno SmithNYJ Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 6% of the time, 4th to 12th 28%, 13th to 24th 48%, and outside the top 24 17%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB16 at the median, QB10 - QB22 in the middle half, and QB5 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 6%Top 12: 35%Top 24: 83% |
QB22— | 13.6 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 6% of the time, 4th to 12th 28%, 13th to 24th 48%, and outside the top 24 17%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB16 at the median, QB10 - QB22 in the middle half, and QB5 - QB26 in the middle 80%. | |
| 23 | QB | Justin HerbertLAC Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 3% of the time, 4th to 12th 24%, 13th to 24th 53%, and outside the top 24 20%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB18 at the median, QB12 - QB24 in the middle half, and QB7 - QB27 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 3%Top 12: 27%Top 24: 80% |
QB23↓ 2 | 12.3 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 3% of the time, 4th to 12th 24%, 13th to 24th 53%, and outside the top 24 20%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB18 at the median, QB12 - QB24 in the middle half, and QB7 - QB27 in the middle 80%. | |
| 24 | QB | Jalon DanielsTB Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 4% of the time, 4th to 12th 22%, 13th to 24th 51%, and outside the top 24 22%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB19 at the median, QB12 - QB24 in the middle half, and QB6 - QB27 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 4%Top 12: 26%Top 24: 78% |
QB24↑ 4 | 12.2 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 4% of the time, 4th to 12th 22%, 13th to 24th 51%, and outside the top 24 22%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB19 at the median, QB12 - QB24 in the middle half, and QB6 - QB27 in the middle 80%. | |
| 25 | QB | Tyler HuntleyBAL Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 6% of the time, 4th to 12th 20%, 13th to 24th 43%, and outside the top 24 31%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB20 at the median, QB12 - QB26 in the middle half, and QB6 - QB28 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 6%Top 12: 26%Top 24: 69% |
QB25NEW | 11.7 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 6% of the time, 4th to 12th 20%, 13th to 24th 43%, and outside the top 24 31%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB20 at the median, QB12 - QB26 in the middle half, and QB6 - QB28 in the middle 80%. | |
| 26 | QB | Cam WardTEN Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 3% of the time, 4th to 12th 21%, 13th to 24th 52%, and outside the top 24 24%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB19 at the median, QB13 - QB24 in the middle half, and QB7 - QB27 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 3%Top 12: 24%Top 24: 76% |
QB26↑ 4 | 11.7 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 3% of the time, 4th to 12th 21%, 13th to 24th 52%, and outside the top 24 24%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB19 at the median, QB13 - QB24 in the middle half, and QB7 - QB27 in the middle 80%. | |
| 27 | QB | Tanner McKeePHI Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 4% of the time, 4th to 12th 16%, 13th to 24th 45%, and outside the top 24 35%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB22 at the median, QB14 - QB26 in the middle half, and QB7 - QB28 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 4%Top 12: 20%Top 24: 65% |
QB27NEW | 10.6 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 4% of the time, 4th to 12th 16%, 13th to 24th 45%, and outside the top 24 35%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB22 at the median, QB14 - QB26 in the middle half, and QB7 - QB28 in the middle 80%. | |
| 28 | QB | Tyson BagentCHI Drivers show how expected points change when each signal is removed. Effects can overlap, so they do not add up to the final projection.
Why isn’t matchup a separate factor?We don’t currently show matchup as a separate factor. We tested a standalone matchup adjustment built from historical defensive performance, and it did not improve predictions consistently out of sample.Matchup information is still reflected indirectly through our outside weekly projection and betting-market inputs — sportsbook odds and prediction markets — when available.We only show a separate factor when it adds reliable predictive value on its own. How to read
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 2% of the time, 4th to 12th 12%, 13th to 24th 45%, and outside the top 24 41%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB23 at the median, QB17 - QB27 in the middle half, and QB10 - QB28 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 2%Top 12: 14%Top 24: 59% |
QB28↓ 4 | 9.2 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 2% of the time, 4th to 12th 12%, 13th to 24th 45%, and outside the top 24 41%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB23 at the median, QB17 - QB27 in the middle half, and QB10 - QB28 in the middle 80%. |
Simulated finishes
This board is ranked by projected fantasy points. The map shows where those same players finished at their own position across the 4,000 simulated weeks the projections came from.
Box: the middle half of a player's simulated finishes. Line: his median. Thin bar: the middle 80%. Two players whose boxes overlap are two players this board does not separate.
Week 6 QB outcome map: the positional finish each player reaches across the 4,000 simulated weeks, as a median, a middle half and a middle 80%. The board itself is ranked by projected fantasy points.
Projected rank
Median finish
1361224
-
QB1 Josh AllenQB9Josh Allen is ranked QB1 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB9 at the median, QB4 - QB16 in the middle half, and QB1 - QB23 in the middle 80%.
-
QB2 Brock PurdyQB9Brock Purdy is ranked QB2 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB9 at the median, QB4 - QB17 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB24 in the middle 80%.
-
QB3 Matthew StaffordQB9Matthew Stafford is ranked QB3 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB9 at the median, QB4 - QB17 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB23 in the middle 80%.
-
QB4 Drake MayeQB11Drake Maye is ranked QB4 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB11 at the median, QB6 - QB18 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB24 in the middle 80%.
-
QB5 Jordan LoveQB11Jordan Love is ranked QB5 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB11 at the median, QB6 - QB18 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
-
QB6 Jayden DanielsQB12Jayden Daniels is ranked QB6 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
-
QB7 Dak PrescottQB12Dak Prescott is ranked QB7 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB18 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB24 in the middle 80%.
-
QB8 Bryce YoungQB12Bryce Young is ranked QB8 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
-
QB9 Kirk CousinsQB12Kirk Cousins is ranked QB9 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
-
QB10 Patrick MahomesQB13Patrick Mahomes is ranked QB10 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB13 at the median, QB6 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
-
QB11 Tyler ShoughQB13Tyler Shough is ranked QB11 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB13 at the median, QB7 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
-
QB12 Jacoby BrissettQB14Jacoby Brissett is ranked QB12 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB14 at the median, QB7 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
-
QB13 Trevor LawrenceQB14Trevor Lawrence is ranked QB13 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB14 at the median, QB7 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
-
QB14 C.J. StroudQB14C.J. Stroud is ranked QB14 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB14 at the median, QB7 - QB21 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
-
QB15 Deshaun WatsonQB14Deshaun Watson is ranked QB15 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB14 at the median, QB7 - QB21 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
-
QB16 Aaron RodgersQB14Aaron Rodgers is ranked QB16 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB14 at the median, QB8 - QB21 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
-
QB17 Jameis WinstonQB15Jameis Winston is ranked QB17 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB15 at the median, QB8 - QB22 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
-
QB18 Michael Penix Jr.QB16Michael Penix Jr. is ranked QB18 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB16 at the median, QB9 - QB22 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB27 in the middle 80%.
-
QB19 Bo NixQB16Bo Nix is ranked QB19 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB16 at the median, QB9 - QB22 in the middle half, and QB5 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
-
QB20 Daniel JonesQB16Daniel Jones is ranked QB20 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB16 at the median, QB10 - QB22 in the middle half, and QB5 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
-
QB21 Sam DarnoldQB17Sam Darnold is ranked QB21 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB17 at the median, QB9 - QB23 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB27 in the middle 80%.
-
QB22 Geno SmithQB16Geno Smith is ranked QB22 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB16 at the median, QB10 - QB22 in the middle half, and QB5 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
-
QB23 Justin HerbertQB18Justin Herbert is ranked QB23 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB18 at the median, QB12 - QB24 in the middle half, and QB7 - QB27 in the middle 80%.
-
QB24 Jalon DanielsQB19Jalon Daniels is ranked QB24 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB19 at the median, QB12 - QB24 in the middle half, and QB6 - QB27 in the middle 80%.
Show QB25 - QB28
-
QB25 Tyler HuntleyQB20Tyler Huntley is ranked QB25 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB20 at the median, QB12 - QB26 in the middle half, and QB6 - QB28 in the middle 80%.
-
QB26 Cam WardQB19Cam Ward is ranked QB26 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB19 at the median, QB13 - QB24 in the middle half, and QB7 - QB27 in the middle 80%.
-
QB27 Tanner McKeeQB22Tanner McKee is ranked QB27 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB22 at the median, QB14 - QB26 in the middle half, and QB7 - QB28 in the middle 80%.
-
QB28 Tyson BagentQB23Tyson Bagent is ranked QB28 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB23 at the median, QB17 - QB27 in the middle half, and QB10 - QB28 in the middle 80%.
Simulated positional finish. The scale is compressed to the right, so equal distances are not equal numbers of places.
The axis compresses lower-ranked finishes so the top of the board stays readable. Use the printed ranges for exact finish positions.
How these are made
This board was built from 2026 usage for 78% of the board, draft position for 100%, an outside projection for 58%, sportsbook props for 50%, an official status for 81%, over 4,000 simulated weeks. The projection and the odds are both unconditional: for a player carrying an official Questionable or Doubtful, the weeks he sits are in the average and in the odds. Ranks follow projected points for Full PPR, 1QB.
Availability is a model input: players ruled out, inactive, on a reserve list or without a game are left off the weekly board, and an official Questionable or Doubtful is simulated as playing 71% and 7% of the time. Status evidence was captured October 15, 2026 21:54 UTC. Movement is previous - current; positive means the player moved up the board (a smaller rank number), measured in positional rank against the final Week 5 board generated before that week's first kickoff (October 8, 2026). Model rankings-v1.4.3, board captured 2026-10-15.
LMD Rankings are produced by Let's Mock Draft's own statistical and market model. They are not analyst rankings: consensus boards are not an input, and nothing is edited by hand.