NFL · 2026 Week 7
2026 Week 7 QB Rankings
Final pre-kickoff board · published October 22, 2026, 17:35 UTC · first kickoff October 23, 2026, 00:15 UTC
Half PPR, 1QB · 30 players projected · updated October 22, 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 7 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 Half 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, 69% of QBs inside the top 12 through Week 6 finished the season inside the top 12. Measured over 325 QB-seasons from 1999-2025, in the same scoring rule as this board.
What stood out in Week 7
30 QBs ranked for Week 7. Drake Maye leads at 17.9 projected points.
Tier breaks
1.8 projected points separate QB26 Cam Ward from QB27 Lamar Jackson.
1.8 projected points separate QB27 Lamar Jackson from QB28 J.J. McCarthy.
Biggest differences from the draft market
Ahead
- Kyler MurrayQB13Recent usage above his season baselineTop 3: 12% · Top 12: 44% · Top 24: 85% +7 vs. QB20
Behind
- Lamar JacksonQB27Recent usage below his season baselineTop 3: 8% · Top 12: 24% · Top 24: 43% -25 vs. QB2
- Patrick MahomesQB15Sportsbooks pricing him below our baselineTop 3: 10% · Top 12: 43% · Top 24: 85% -8 vs. QB7
Movement
Risers
- C.J. StroudQB7Top 3: 14% · Top 12: 52% · Top 24: 89% ↑ 7
- Tanner McKeeQB21Top 3: 9% · Top 12: 37% · Top 24: 77% ↑ 6
- Aaron RodgersQB11Top 3: 11% · Top 12: 47% · Top 24: 87% ↑ 5
Fallers
- Jameis WinstonQB30Top 3: 3% · Top 12: 15% · Top 24: 35% ↓ 13
- Matthew StaffordQB9Top 3: 14% · Top 12: 52% · Top 24: 89% ↓ 6
- Jacoby BrissettQB18Top 3: 8% · Top 12: 38% · Top 24: 83% ↓ 6
Positional movement since the final Week 6 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 | 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 17% of the time, 4th to 12th 40%, 13th to 24th 33%, and outside the top 24 9%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB11 at the median, QB5 - QB18 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB24 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 17%Top 12: 57%Top 24: 91% |
QB1↑ 3 | 17.9 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 17% of the time, 4th to 12th 40%, 13th to 24th 33%, and outside the top 24 9%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB11 at the median, QB5 - QB18 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB24 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 16% of the time, 4th to 12th 40%, 13th to 24th 35%, and outside the top 24 10%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB11 at the median, QB5 - QB18 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB24 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 16%Top 12: 56%Top 24: 90% |
QB2— | 17.5 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 16% of the time, 4th to 12th 40%, 13th to 24th 35%, and outside the top 24 10%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB11 at the median, QB5 - QB18 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB24 in the middle 80%. | |
| 3 | QB | Jordan LoveGBQQuestionable 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 18% of the time, 4th to 12th 34%, 13th to 24th 36%, and outside the top 24 13%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB5 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 18%Top 12: 51%Top 24: 87% |
QB3↑ 2 | 17.5 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 18% of the time, 4th to 12th 34%, 13th to 24th 36%, and outside the top 24 13%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB5 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB26 in the middle 80%. | |
| 4 | QB | Jared GoffDET 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 35%, and outside the top 24 11%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB11 at the median, QB5 - QB19 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 16%Top 12: 54%Top 24: 89% |
QB4NEW | 17.1 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 16% of the time, 4th to 12th 38%, 13th to 24th 35%, and outside the top 24 11%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB11 at the median, QB5 - QB19 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB25 in the middle 80%. | |
| 5 | QB | Joe BurrowCIN 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 38%, 13th to 24th 34%, and outside the top 24 13%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 15%Top 12: 53%Top 24: 87% |
QB5NEW | 17.0 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 15% of the time, 4th to 12th 38%, 13th to 24th 34%, and outside the top 24 13%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB26 in the middle 80%. | |
| 6 | 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 15% of the time, 4th to 12th 37%, 13th to 24th 37%, and outside the top 24 11%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB19 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 15%Top 12: 52%Top 24: 89% |
QB6↑ 2 | 16.9 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 15% of the time, 4th to 12th 37%, 13th to 24th 37%, and outside the top 24 11%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB19 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%. | |
| 7 | 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 14% of the time, 4th to 12th 38%, 13th to 24th 38%, and outside the top 24 11%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB19 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 14%Top 12: 52%Top 24: 89% |
QB7↑ 7 | 16.7 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 14% of the time, 4th to 12th 38%, 13th to 24th 38%, and outside the top 24 11%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB19 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%. | |
| 8 | QB | Caleb WilliamsCHI 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 17% of the time, 4th to 12th 32%, 13th to 24th 37%, and outside the top 24 14%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB13 at the median, QB6 - QB21 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 17%Top 12: 48%Top 24: 86% |
QB8NEW | 16.7 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 17% of the time, 4th to 12th 32%, 13th to 24th 37%, and outside the top 24 14%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB13 at the median, QB6 - QB21 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB26 in the middle 80%. | |
| 9 | 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 14% of the time, 4th to 12th 39%, 13th to 24th 36%, and outside the top 24 11%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB19 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 14%Top 12: 52%Top 24: 89% |
QB9↓ 6 | 16.6 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 14% of the time, 4th to 12th 39%, 13th to 24th 36%, and outside the top 24 11%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB19 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%. | |
| 10 | 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 37%, 13th to 24th 38%, and outside the top 24 11%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB19 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 13%Top 12: 50%Top 24: 89% |
QB10↓ 3 | 16.5 | 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 - QB19 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%. | |
| 11 | 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 11% of the time, 4th to 12th 36%, 13th to 24th 40%, and outside the top 24 13%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB13 at the median, QB7 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 11%Top 12: 47%Top 24: 87% |
QB11↑ 5 | 15.7 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 11% of the time, 4th to 12th 36%, 13th to 24th 40%, and outside the top 24 13%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB13 at the median, QB7 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB26 in the middle 80%. | |
| 12 | 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 10% of the time, 4th to 12th 35%, 13th to 24th 41%, and outside the top 24 14%. 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: 10%Top 12: 45%Top 24: 86% |
QB12↓ 1 | 15.4 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 10% of the time, 4th to 12th 35%, 13th to 24th 41%, and outside the top 24 14%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB14 at the median, QB7 - QB21 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB26 in the middle 80%. | |
| 13 | QB | Kyler MurrayMIN 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 12% of the time, 4th to 12th 32%, 13th to 24th 41%, and outside the top 24 15%. 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: 12%Top 12: 44%Top 24: 85% |
QB13NEW | 15.3 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 12% of the time, 4th to 12th 32%, 13th to 24th 41%, and outside the top 24 15%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB14 at the median, QB7 - QB21 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB26 in the middle 80%. | |
| 14 | 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 11% of the time, 4th to 12th 34%, 13th to 24th 41%, and outside the top 24 15%. 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: 44%Top 24: 85% |
QB14↓ 5 | 15.2 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 11% of the time, 4th to 12th 34%, 13th to 24th 41%, and outside the top 24 15%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB14 at the median, QB7 - QB21 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB26 in the middle 80%. | |
| 15 | 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 10% of the time, 4th to 12th 33%, 13th to 24th 42%, and outside the top 24 15%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB14 at the median, QB8 - QB22 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 10%Top 12: 43%Top 24: 85% |
QB15↓ 5 | 15.0 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 10% of the time, 4th to 12th 33%, 13th to 24th 42%, and outside the top 24 15%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB14 at the median, QB8 - QB22 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB26 in the middle 80%. | |
| 16 | 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 9% of the time, 4th to 12th 34%, 13th to 24th 44%, and outside the top 24 13%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB14 at the median, QB8 - QB21 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 9%Top 12: 43%Top 24: 87% |
QB16↓ 1 | 14.9 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 9% of the time, 4th to 12th 34%, 13th to 24th 44%, and outside the top 24 13%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB14 at the median, QB8 - QB21 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB26 in the middle 80%. | |
| 17 | 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 8% of the time, 4th to 12th 32%, 13th to 24th 44%, 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: 8%Top 12: 40%Top 24: 84% |
QB17↑ 2 | 14.3 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 8% of the time, 4th to 12th 32%, 13th to 24th 44%, 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 | 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 8% of the time, 4th to 12th 30%, 13th to 24th 45%, and outside the top 24 17%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB16 at the median, QB9 - QB22 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 8%Top 12: 38%Top 24: 83% |
QB18↓ 6 | 14.2 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 8% of the time, 4th to 12th 30%, 13th to 24th 45%, and outside the top 24 17%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB16 at the median, QB9 - QB22 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB26 in the middle 80%. | |
| 19 | 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 7% of the time, 4th to 12th 30%, 13th to 24th 46%, and outside the top 24 16%. 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: 7%Top 12: 38%Top 24: 84% |
QB19↑ 3 | 14.1 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 7% of the time, 4th to 12th 30%, 13th to 24th 46%, and outside the top 24 16%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB16 at the median, QB9 - QB22 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB27 in the middle 80%. | |
| 20 | 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 8% of the time, 4th to 12th 29%, 13th to 24th 44%, and outside the top 24 19%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB16 at the median, QB9 - QB23 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB27 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 8%Top 12: 37%Top 24: 81% |
QB20↓ 2 | 13.8 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 8% of the time, 4th to 12th 29%, 13th to 24th 44%, and outside the top 24 19%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB16 at the median, QB9 - QB23 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB27 in the middle 80%. | |
| 21 | 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 9% of the time, 4th to 12th 28%, 13th to 24th 41%, and outside the top 24 23%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB17 at the median, QB9 - QB24 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB28 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 9%Top 12: 37%Top 24: 77% |
QB21↑ 6 | 13.8 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 9% of the time, 4th to 12th 28%, 13th to 24th 41%, and outside the top 24 23%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB17 at the median, QB9 - QB24 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB28 in the middle 80%. | |
| 22 | 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 6% of the time, 4th to 12th 29%, 13th to 24th 46%, and outside the top 24 19%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB17 at the median, QB10 - QB23 in the middle half, and QB5 - QB27 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 6%Top 12: 35%Top 24: 81% |
QB22↓ 1 | 13.4 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 6% of the time, 4th to 12th 29%, 13th to 24th 46%, and outside the top 24 19%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB17 at the median, QB10 - QB23 in the middle half, and QB5 - QB27 in the middle 80%. | |
| 23 | QB | Malik WillisMIA 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 21%, 13th to 24th 52%, and outside the top 24 23%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB19 at the median, QB12 - QB24 in the middle half, and QB7 - QB27 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 4%Top 12: 25%Top 24: 77% |
QB23NEW | 11.9 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 4% of the time, 4th to 12th 21%, 13th to 24th 52%, and outside the top 24 23%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB19 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 5% of the time, 4th to 12th 23%, 13th to 24th 42%, and outside the top 24 30%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB20 at the median, QB11 - QB25 in the middle half, and QB5 - QB28 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 5%Top 12: 28%Top 24: 70% |
QB24↓ 1 | 11.9 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 5% of the time, 4th to 12th 23%, 13th to 24th 42%, and outside the top 24 30%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB20 at the median, QB11 - QB25 in the middle half, and QB5 - QB28 in the middle 80%. | |
| 25 | 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 2% of the time, 4th to 12th 18%, 13th to 24th 53%, and outside the top 24 27%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB20 at the median, QB14 - QB25 in the middle half, and QB9 - QB28 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 2%Top 12: 20%Top 24: 73% |
QB25↓ 5 | 10.8 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 2% of the time, 4th to 12th 18%, 13th to 24th 53%, and outside the top 24 27%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB20 at the median, QB14 - QB25 in the middle half, and QB9 - 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 2% of the time, 4th to 12th 17%, 13th to 24th 52%, and outside the top 24 30%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB21 at the median, QB15 - QB25 in the middle half, and QB9 - QB28 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 2%Top 12: 18%Top 24: 70% |
QB26— | 10.5 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 2% of the time, 4th to 12th 17%, 13th to 24th 52%, and outside the top 24 30%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB21 at the median, QB15 - QB25 in the middle half, and QB9 - QB28 in the middle 80%. | |
| 27 | QB | Lamar JacksonBALQQuestionable · Starter not confirmed · projection includes a 50% chance of starting 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 8% of the time, 4th to 12th 16%, 13th to 24th 20%, and outside the top 24 57%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB28 at the median, QB13 - QB42 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB44 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 8%Top 12: 24%Top 24: 43% |
QB27↑ 2 | 8.7 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 8% of the time, 4th to 12th 16%, 13th to 24th 20%, and outside the top 24 57%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB28 at the median, QB13 - QB42 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB44 in the middle 80%. | |
| 28 | QB | J.J. McCarthyNYG 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
Starter not confirmed · projection includes a 50% chance of starting
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 4% of the time, 4th to 12th 12%, 13th to 24th 22%, and outside the top 24 61%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB30 at the median, QB18 - QB67 in the middle half, and QB8 - QB68 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 4%Top 12: 16%Top 24: 39% |
QB28NEW | 6.9 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 4% of the time, 4th to 12th 12%, 13th to 24th 22%, and outside the top 24 61%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB30 at the median, QB18 - QB67 in the middle half, and QB8 - QB68 in the middle 80%. | |
| 29 | 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
Starter not confirmed · projection includes a 45% chance of starting
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 4% of the time, 4th to 12th 11%, 13th to 24th 21%, and outside the top 24 64%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB41 at the median, QB19 - QB43 in the middle half, and QB9 - QB44 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 4%Top 12: 15%Top 24: 36% |
QB29↓ 4 | 6.3 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 4% of the time, 4th to 12th 11%, 13th to 24th 21%, and outside the top 24 64%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB41 at the median, QB19 - QB43 in the middle half, and QB9 - QB44 in the middle 80%. | |
| 30 | 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
Starter not confirmed · projection includes a 45% chance of starting
Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 3% of the time, 4th to 12th 12%, 13th to 24th 20%, and outside the top 24 65%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB52 at the median, QB19 - QB54 in the middle half, and QB9 - QB55 in the middle 80%.
Top 3: 3%Top 12: 15%Top 24: 35% |
QB30↓ 13 | 6.1 | Across the simulated weeks at the position, he finishes in the top 3 3% of the time, 4th to 12th 12%, 13th to 24th 20%, and outside the top 24 65%. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB52 at the median, QB19 - QB54 in the middle half, and QB9 - QB55 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 7 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
13612243660
-
QB1 Drake MayeQB11Drake Maye is ranked QB1 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB11 at the median, QB5 - QB18 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB24 in the middle 80%.
-
QB2 Brock PurdyQB11Brock Purdy is ranked QB2 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB11 at the median, QB5 - QB18 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB24 in the middle 80%.
-
QB3 Jordan LoveQB12Jordan Love is ranked QB3 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB5 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
-
QB4 Jared GoffQB11Jared Goff is ranked QB4 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB11 at the median, QB5 - QB19 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
-
QB5 Joe BurrowQB12Joe Burrow is ranked QB5 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB20 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
-
QB6 Bryce YoungQB12Bryce Young is ranked QB6 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB19 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
-
QB7 C.J. StroudQB12C.J. Stroud is ranked QB7 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB19 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
-
QB8 Caleb WilliamsQB13Caleb Williams is ranked QB8 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB13 at the median, QB6 - QB21 in the middle half, and QB2 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
-
QB9 Matthew StaffordQB12Matthew Stafford is ranked QB9 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB19 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
-
QB10 Dak PrescottQB12Dak Prescott is ranked QB10 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB12 at the median, QB6 - QB19 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB25 in the middle 80%.
-
QB11 Aaron RodgersQB13Aaron Rodgers 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 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
-
QB12 Tyler ShoughQB14Tyler Shough is ranked QB12 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%.
-
QB13 Kyler MurrayQB14Kyler Murray is ranked QB13 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%.
-
QB14 Kirk CousinsQB14Kirk Cousins is ranked QB14 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%.
-
QB15 Patrick MahomesQB14Patrick Mahomes is ranked QB15 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB14 at the median, QB8 - QB22 in the middle half, and QB3 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
-
QB16 Deshaun WatsonQB14Deshaun Watson is ranked QB16 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB14 at the median, QB8 - QB21 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
-
QB17 Bo NixQB15Bo Nix 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 Jacoby BrissettQB16Jacoby Brissett 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 - QB26 in the middle 80%.
-
QB19 Geno SmithQB16Geno Smith is ranked QB19 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%.
-
QB20 Michael Penix Jr.QB16Michael Penix Jr. is ranked QB20 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB16 at the median, QB9 - QB23 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB27 in the middle 80%.
-
QB21 Tanner McKeeQB17Tanner McKee is ranked QB21 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB17 at the median, QB9 - QB24 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB28 in the middle 80%.
-
QB22 Sam DarnoldQB17Sam Darnold is ranked QB22 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB17 at the median, QB10 - QB23 in the middle half, and QB5 - QB27 in the middle 80%.
-
QB23 Malik WillisQB19Malik Willis is ranked QB23 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB19 at the median, QB12 - QB24 in the middle half, and QB7 - QB27 in the middle 80%.
-
QB24 Jalon DanielsQB20Jalon Daniels is ranked QB24 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB20 at the median, QB11 - QB25 in the middle half, and QB5 - QB28 in the middle 80%.
Show QB25 - QB30
-
QB25 Daniel JonesQB20Daniel Jones is ranked QB25 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB20 at the median, QB14 - QB25 in the middle half, and QB9 - QB28 in the middle 80%.
-
QB26 Cam WardQB21Cam Ward is ranked QB26 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB21 at the median, QB15 - QB25 in the middle half, and QB9 - QB28 in the middle 80%.
-
QB27 Lamar JacksonQB28Lamar Jackson is ranked QB27 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB28 at the median, QB13 - QB42 in the middle half, and QB4 - QB44 in the middle 80%.
-
QB28 J.J. McCarthyQB30J.J. McCarthy is ranked QB28 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB30 at the median, QB18 - QB67 in the middle half, and QB8 - QB68 in the middle 80%.
-
QB29 Tyler HuntleyQB41Tyler Huntley is ranked QB29 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB41 at the median, QB19 - QB43 in the middle half, and QB9 - QB44 in the middle 80%.
-
QB30 Jameis WinstonQB52Jameis Winston is ranked QB30 on projected fantasy points. Across the simulated weeks he finishes QB52 at the median, QB19 - QB54 in the middle half, and QB9 - QB55 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 76% of the board, draft position for 99%, an outside projection for 54%, sportsbook props for 66%, 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 Half 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 22, 2026 17:33 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 6 board generated before that week's first kickoff (October 15, 2026). Model rankings-v1.5.0, board captured 2026-10-22.
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.