The plan against the game · plan Sun Oct 18, 9:28 AM · report Tue Oct 20, 10:52 AM Daniels escapes a Niners front with no Bosa. Kittle eats near the goal line. script partly held 4 hit7 missed projection B · 69 open
San Francisco should win this through the air and inside the 20 while Washington's run game gets walled off — and Jayden Daniels' legs are the one Commanders lever that pays either way.
San Francisco should lead early and often, with its scoring coming from short fields and red-zone finishing rather than a long-yardage avalanche — its plays-per-game is the lowest in the dossier. Washington can move the ball between the 20s against a bend defense but has been stalling inside it all year, and its pre-snap penalties keep creating the long downs this secondary eats. Expect the Commanders' pass rate to climb past 65% once they trail, with a meaningful chunk of their yardage coming on Daniels scrambles against a 49ers edge rotation missing Bosa, Height and Greenlaw. Washington's rushing attack, with Croskey-Merritt out, is the likeliest thing in this game to go nowhere.
San Francisco led wire to wire, went up 20-3 by halftime and then stopped scoring, and Washington's two-touchdown fourth-quarter chase got it to 23-17 — SF won but failed to cover the 7.5, and 40 points landed well under the 51.5, exactly as the model's three market calls said. The projection's team shapes broke in one direction: Washington threw 40 times for 300 yards and ran 17 times for 53, the mirror image of the 32.5/27.5 split it was given.
The plan read the shape of the game almost perfectly: SF leading early on passing and red-zone finishing, Washington's ground game going nowhere, pass rate climbing past 65% once behind, average pace. Where it broke was the single mechanism it leaned on hardest for Washington — Daniels' legs against a Bosa-less edge — which inverted completely: SF's front generated 28.9% sack-or-hit and Daniels ran four times for ten yards while throwing for 300, the exact opposite of the U1/D6 pairing. The second miss was directional on penalties: the plan expected WAS pre-snap flags against a clean SF, and got one WAS pre-snap flag against 11 SF accepted penalties for 88 yards. The scramble inversion is a real read (pressure, not script, killed it); the penalty inversion is almost certainly the bounce given SF's 1.8 flags-per-game input.
The script: The favorite path is on the page: SF stayed balanced (checks: 51.7% pass rate vs a 0.511 season rate, 'balanced' held), McCaffrey and Juszczyk held the clock on a 16-play, 6:13 drive to end the half, three of four red-zone trips became touchdowns, and the margin reached two scores by the 6:01 mark of Q3. Washington's lean held too — 72.1% pass rate against a 53.7% season rate — and pace landed at 121 plays against a 121.5 league figure. What did not hold is the stated engine of Washington's side: its yardage was supposed to come from Daniels scrambles, and instead came from 300 passing yards while he was sacked four times, and the 'margin gets to two scores and the attempts come down' ending nearly produced a cover for the dog at the SF 17 with 2:00 left.
Expected: Pass rate near 52-56%, 28-33 attempts, McCaffrey 13-16 carries at a pedestrian clip plus 4-6 targets, and Kittle as the leading target with the receiver room gutted. The points arrive as touchdowns rather than field goals.
Happened: 54.8% dropback rate (within the 52-56% call), 29 attempts (28-33), McCaffrey 16 carries at 4.0 ypc, Kittle the leading target at 8. Only the McCaffrey target count (10, not 4-6) and the form of the scoring (two McCaffrey goal-line runs rather than through the air) diverged.
Expected: 32-36 attempts with the pass rate climbing past 65% once behind, 9-12 Daniels carries including scrambles, White in the 10-13 carry range for modest yardage, and target volume spread McLaurin/Diggs/Williams/Okonkwo with little separation.
Happened: The pass rate call nailed it (70.3%, past 65%) but the attempts overshot (40 vs 32-36), Daniels had 4 carries not 9-12, and White got 7 carries not 10-13. The target spread was right — Okonkwo 7, Diggs 7, Burks 6, Williams 4 — though McLaurin's first-quarter injury, not design, caused the distribution.
San Francisco should lead early and often, with its scoring coming from short fields and red-zone finishing rather than a long-yardage avalanche — its plays-per-game is the lowest in the dossier. Washington can move the ball between the 20s against a bend defense but has been stalling inside it all year, and its pre-snap penalties keep creating the long downs this secondary eats. Expect the Commanders' pass rate to climb past 65% once they trail, with a meaningful chunk of their yardage coming on Daniels scrambles against a 49ers edge rotation missing Bosa, Height and Greenlaw. Washington's rushing attack, with Croskey-Merritt out, is the likeliest thing in this game to go nowhere.
SF stays balanced early, lets McCaffrey and Juszczyk hold the clock, and converts three or four red-zone trips into touchdowns against the league's worst finishing defense. Kittle and the backfield soak up the targets a gutted receiver room leaves behind; the margin gets to two scores by the third quarter and the attempts come down.
Washington keeps it clean — no false starts, no drive-killers — and Daniels' legs turn third-and-long into first downs against a front with no closer. A takeaway or two (the formula from week 3 against Seattle) buys the short fields its offense has needed all season to reach 20+, and a 7.5-point dog hangs around into the fourth.
The read
San Francisco by a touchdown-plus is the right shape, but the paths to each side's points are narrow and specific. Washington's defense has one real strength — it holds the run (9th in rush EPA allowed, 2nd in fantasy points allowed to backs, 3.91 yards a carry) — and one glaring hole: it gives up a touchdown on 82.4% of opponent red-zone trips, 31st in the league, and ranks 30th against tight ends and 29th in pass yards allowed. San Francisco finishes at an 83.3% clip inside the 20 and is the league's most efficient red-zone offense. That collision, not yardage, is where the 30 implied points come from. Washington, chasing with its lead back out, meets a defense ranked 3rd in EPA allowed, 3rd in yards per attempt and 3rd in pass success allowed — but with no pass rush left (Bosa out a fourth straight week, Height did not practice, Greenlaw suspended). That is the exact profile that turns Jayden Daniels into a runner.
Why
SF's receiver room is down to Kittle, McCaffrey, Cooks, Cowing and Watkins; Deebo is out, Evans did not practice all week. So the target tree concentrates on Kittle (92% of snaps in each of the last two weeks) against the league's 30th-ranked tight-end defense, and short-field throws become the scoring mechanism because Washington's front takes away the goal-line run. On the other side, Washington's own offense has negative rush EPA in all five games and leads the league in pre-snap flags (3.0 a game against a 1.55 league rate) — long downs against a secondary that does not allow completions. Daniels' answer all season has been to run: 9 for 103 and two scores in week 5, 7 for 69 in week 2.
What would change it
Evans and Diggs are both game-time decisions; Kirk may be activated. If Washington wins the turnover battle the way it did against Seattle in week 3, this becomes a one-score game and the under-script calls break.
The most efficient offense in the dossier on a small number of snaps: 8.42 yards per attempt, 0.143 field EPA per play, 69% completions, and only 56.8 plays a game. It scores in three plays, not twelve.
Explosive passing on low volume (5 and 6 passes of 20+ in weeks 2 and 3) plus near-perfect red-zone finishing — 83.3% touchdowns per trip, with McCaffrey at the goal line and Kittle as the short-field target.
Their own run game is not the efficiency engine the yardage implies (negative rush EPA in weeks 2-5), and the offense is leveraged to a couple of chunk throws — take away YAC and they stall, as they did for 34 minutes against Denver in week 4.
Washington stops the run (9th in rush EPA allowed, 2nd in fantasy points to backs, 8th in rush yards allowed) and gives up everything else: 29th in pass yards allowed, 30th against tight ends, 31st in red-zone touchdown rate conceded. This is a passing and finishing game for San Francisco, not a ground game.
Deebo Samuel out (hamstring), Mike Evans questionable after not practicing all week with ribs and an Achilles — RotoBaller on Saturday had him 'on the wrong side of questionable'; Robinson, Pearsall, Stribling and Kirk all on IR (Kirk may be activated per Shanahan Saturday), and KhaDarel Hodge was released after a 56% snap game in week 3. That leaves Kittle, McCaffrey and Cooks/Cowing/Watkins. Washington's defense is without Chenal and Omenihu with Kinlaw and Chaisson not practicing — less interior push on an already-quiet rush.
Pass rate near 52-56%, 28-33 attempts, McCaffrey 13-16 carries at a pedestrian clip plus 4-6 targets, and Kittle as the leading target with the receiver room gutted. The points arrive as touchdowns rather than field goals.
A volume offense that does not finish: 64 plays a game, 6.08 yards per attempt, 58.6% completions, negative rush EPA in all five games, and a league-worst pre-snap penalty rate (3.0 a game vs 1.55 league).
Daniels' legs and short fields. He ran 9 times for 103 and two touchdowns in week 5; the week-3 win over Seattle came off three takeaways, not offense.
Third down and their own flags — 5-of-15, 8-of-15, 3-of-14, 2-of-16 across the first four weeks, with an 87-yard touchdown wiped out by an illegal shift in week 4. The run game has never produced positive EPA.
San Francisco is 3rd in EPA allowed, 3rd in yards per attempt, 3rd in pass success allowed and 7th in rush EPA allowed — and commits the second-fewest penalties in the league, so none of the free yards Washington has been handed elsewhere show up here. What SF does not do is rush the passer: 18th in pressure generated, with Bosa out a fourth straight game, Height not practicing and Judon released. Upton Stout (2nd percentile in his group) is the one chartable coverage hole, and he's questionable.
Croskey-Merritt out (groin) hands the backfield to White and Ekeler; Mariota out, so Kaliakmanis is the backup. McLaurin (hamstring) and Burks (shoulder) carry no designation and will play; Diggs is questionable but practiced limited Friday and Saturday and is trending to go. Laremy Tunsil is on IR at tackle — not in any projection, and a reason to temper any efficiency read on this offense's protection.
32-36 attempts with the pass rate climbing past 65% once behind, 9-12 Daniels carries including scrambles, White in the 10-13 carry range for modest yardage, and target volume spread McLaurin/Diggs/Williams/Okonkwo with little separation.
Each call is one player, one market, one side of the line Kalshi quoted when the plan was written; graded off the box score, with the report's read of whether the reason given showed up. The rungs are the same call down the Kalshi ladder, Edge halfway to its last rung and Edge+ the last, at Kalshi's last pregame price.
In the game: Miss at 10 rush yards. The stated mechanism — open scramble lanes without Bosa — never appeared: SF got to him on 28.9% of dropbacks and he took 4 sacks; he also was not the short-yardage runner (McNichols took 5 carries).
No Bosa, no Greenlaw and a thin edge rotation means open scramble lanes, and with their lead back out he is the short-yardage runner they trust while chasing points.
Week 5 vs NYG: 9 carries, 103 yards, 2 rushing TDs; week 2 at DAL 7 for 69 before exiting. SF generates pressure at the 18th rate and Bosa misses a fourth straight game; Height did not practice, Greenlaw suspended.
vs #7 rush EPA allowed — that rank is built on designed runs by backs, not quarterback scrambles, and the defenders who made it are the ones missing. The model is far above the line; the exchange prices it near a coin flip.
In the game: Hit at 3 receptions on 4 targets with a 67.2% snap share, exactly the trailing-script underneath role the plan described, including the 23-yard conversion at Q4 9:53 that set up the touchdown.
A touchdown-plus deficit pushes Washington into the throwing rate it ran in weeks 4 and 5, and he has held a two-thirds snap share through both of those games as the underneath option.
Snap share 69% (wk4) and 68% (wk5); 8 targets vs IND, 3-of-3 vs NYG. WAS trailing pass rates: 71.8% (wk4), 67.1% allowed-state in wk5. Engine has him near three catches against a line of one and a half.
vs #9 pass EPA allowed — the call is volume in a forced script, not efficiency; the exchange sits under the model's catch count.
In the game: Hit — 11-yard touchdown on the opening drive, 8 targets and an 88.7% snap share as the short-field target with the receiver room thin, the mechanism as written.
Washington gives up touchdowns on nearly every trip inside its 20 and is among the softest in the league against tight ends; with the receiver room gutted he is the short-field target.
Kittle: 4 TDs in weeks 2-4 on 92% and 91% snap shares; WAS allows 82.4% red-zone TD rate (31st) and 22.2 fantasy points a game to TEs (30th). SF converts 83.3% of its own trips.
vs #23 EPA allowed and #31 red-zone TD rate allowed. This rests on the finishing half of the split, not on yardage; anytime_td calls are 8-for-12 on the season.
In the game: Miss. He took 4 carries all game and neither WAS touchdown was his; both goal-line looks the plan imagined belonged to SF, and WAS's scores came on 1- and 9-yard throws.
With their starting back out, the short-yardage runner in this offense is the quarterback — he took both goal-line scores himself last week.
2 rushing TDs in week 5 on 9 carries; White has one rushing TD in four games and Ekeler is the passing-down back. WAS projected for roughly 27 carries.
vs #3 EPA allowed and #10 red-zone TD rate allowed — the rank binds on efficiency, so this is purely a who-gets-the-carry read; the exchange is well below the model.
In the game: Miss at 1 pass TD. SF did finish (3/4 red zone) but did it on the ground — McCaffrey twice from the 1 on left guard — which directly contradicts the 'the scores have to come through the air' reasoning against a run-stopping front.
San Francisco finishes almost everything inside the 20 and Washington concedes it; with the Commanders' front built to stop the run, the scores have to come through the air.
SF red-zone TD rate 83.3% (5-of-5 wk2, 3-of-3 wk3, 3-of-3 wk5); WAS allows 82.4% per trip, 31st, and has conceded only two rushing TDs all year with the 8th-fewest rush yards. SF implied 30 points.
vs #22 pass EPA allowed. An efficiency call and labeled as such — the weaker kind — but pass_tds calls are 8-for-13 this season and the exchange prices it below the model on the finishing split.
In the game: Hit at 27 rush yards. Exactly the mechanism: 7 carries for -0.25 rush EPA against a front that gave nothing, and the chasing script turned his work into 4 receptions for 30 and a receiving touchdown.
He inherits the lead role but meets the one front that smothers backs, and a chasing script turns his touches into checkdowns instead of carries.
White's season high is 43 yards on 7-8 carries a game; SF allows 3.67 yards a carry and 97.6 rush yards a game. WAS has negative rush EPA in all five games.
vs #7 rush EPA allowed. The model is well under the line while the exchange sits near even — note our unders against top-10 defenses are the weakest bucket this season (43%), so this is sized accordingly.
In the game: Miss at 117. Washington's front did not smother him (16 carries, 64 yards, +5.41 rush EPA) and his receiving work was not checkdown-sized — 10 targets, 9 catches, 53 yards, 46 of it YAC.
Washington's front is its one good unit, and San Francisco still gives away a handful of carries a week; his receiving work has been checkdown-sized all season.
Rushing by week: 68, 23, 75, 52, 68 — never past 75. Black has taken 6 carries in each of the last two games. WAS allows the 2nd-fewest fantasy points to backs and the 8th-fewest rush yards.
vs #9 rush EPA allowed. The exchange implies a comfortable over; the model is a dozen yards under the line. Same top-10 caveat as above.
In the game: Miss at 94 yards, but the reasoning held: he played a snap count (40.3%) and saw only 5 targets. The number died to two deep shots (54 and 24) worth 99 air yards, not to volume.
Ribs and an Achilles kept him off the practice field all week and he is a game-time decision; even if he dresses, he plays on a snap count.
FantasyPros early Sunday: questionable, unable to practice through Friday. RotoBaller Saturday cited Larry Krueger that he looks 'on the wrong side of questionable'. He played 33% of snaps the last time he suited up hurt (week 3).
vs #22 pass EPA allowed — a soft matchup he may not be healthy enough to use. The exchange prices him as a full-go starter. Void risk if he is ruled inactive.
In the game: Miss at 69. He was targeted 7 times and caught all 7 on a 76.1% snap share — SF neither limited the tight end nor did WAS rotate him out; 34 YAC says he was the pressure valve all night.
San Francisco is one of the stingiest defenses in football against tight ends and Washington still rotates three of them through the formation.
SF allows 8.16 fantasy points a game to TEs (4th) and ranks 3rd in pass success allowed. Okonkwo: 16, 5 and 60 yards in three games; Bates and Sinnott still take snaps.
vs #9 pass EPA allowed and #4 in points allowed to tight ends — the one position where points-allowed-to-position carries real signal. Model and exchange both sit roughly at the line, so this is the matchup breaking the tie.
In the game: Hit. Purdy threw 29 times, led from 10:58 of the first quarter onward, and the attempts came down to 19 second-half plays — exactly the lead-protecting profile the call described.
A home favorite of more than a touchdown throws fewer risky balls late — the attempts come down with a lead, and that is where picks live.
SF implied 30 points, -470 on the moneyline; Purdy has 2 INTs in five games and SF's offensive INT rate is 1.4% against a Washington defense generating 1.6%.
vs #22 pass EPA allowed. This is a script call on volume: the 1+ interception rung is the model's weakest number and runs 3-4 points high on a typical quarterback, most of all for big favorites.
In the game: Miss at 300. Both halves of the mechanism failed: WAS completed 29 of 40 with +17.6 CPOE against the 'hardest secondary to complete against,' and the scrambles that were supposed to eat dropbacks produced 11 yards.
This secondary is the hardest in the league to complete against efficiently, and his own answer to a quiet pass rush is to take off — scrambles that eat into dropbacks.
SF allows 6.06 yards per attempt (3rd), ranks 3rd in pass success allowed and 5th in QB production allowed. Daniels: 164 at PHI, 199 vs NYG; WAS's own mark is 6.08 Y/A on 58.6% completions.
vs #9 pass EPA allowed. Both the model and the exchange sit above the line; what the blend misses is that his rushing volume comes out of his attempt count in exactly this matchup.
Legs the same script produces together: they move as one, which is what a same-game parlay pays for.
One mechanism: a 49ers front that holds the run but cannot finish a rush. Daniels escapes for yardage that never shows up as passing yards, which simultaneously caps his attempts and takes carries away from a back already facing a top-10 run defense.
Washington concedes a touchdown on better than four of five trips inside its 20 and is 30th against tight ends; with the receiver room gutted those scores funnel to Kittle. The same comfortable scoreboard that produces the touchdowns is the one that keeps Purdy from forcing throws late.
The two fronts in this game are each better against the run than anything else they do — SF 7th and WAS 9th in rush EPA allowed, with WAS also 2nd in production allowed to backs. Both lead backs are priced off volume the matchup does not reward.
grade · 69
| Proj | Actual | Diff | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Points | 29.5 | 23 | -6.5 | |
| Pass yds | 239.5 | 264.0 | +24.5 | |
| Rush yds | 107.3 | 126.0 | +18.7 | |
| Pass att | 32.4 | 29 | -3.4 | |
| Carries | 26.5 | 29 | +2.5 |
| Proj | Actual | Diff | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Points | 22.0 | 17 | -5 | |
| Pass yds | 210.9 | 300.0 | +89.1 | |
| Rush yds | 114.9 | 53.0 | -61.9 | |
| Pass att | 32.5 | 40 | +7.5 | |
| Carries | 27.5 | 17 | -10.5 |
The grade of 0.694 (B) is carried almost entirely by the market layer — winner SF, WAS +7.5, under 51.5 all cashed (market_score 1.0) — while the team layer (0.626) was dragged down by three 'big' flags, all on Washington: pass yards 300 vs 210.9, rush yards 53 vs 114.9, carries 17 vs 27.5. The engine blended Washington to a 55.8% pass rate and 62.3 plays; Washington ran 64 plays at a 70.3% pass rate, having trailed for every single snap of the game (0 plays leading, 0 tied). San Francisco's side of the projection was close to clean — 29 attempts vs 32.4, 264 pass yards vs 239.5, 126 rush yards vs 107.3, 29 carries vs 26.5 — and only the 29.5 points missed, by 6.5, because SF scored nothing after the 6:01 mark of the third quarter. Player score 0.606 (29 of 46 lines) is the same story: the Washington pass-catcher lines all blew through their projections on volume the model never gave them, and Daniels' projected 66.7 rush yards became 10.
Pattern: Washington moves the ball between the 20s and does not finish, while its defense bends on the field and then concedes the touchdown at the goal line. The offense is a throw-first, chunk-plus-checkdown unit the moment it trails, and it trails almost immediately.
This week: San Francisco tried exactly the right thing and had the efficiency: 8.42 Y/A season-to-date, +0.143 field EPA and 0.833 RZ TD rate entering, and it converted that into 4 explosive passes and 3 RZ touchdowns on limited volume (29 attempts, 62 plays). It never needed the run game as a primary lever — McCaffrey's 16 carries for 64 were clock, not creation, though they produced +5.41 rush EPA at the goal line.
What an opponent needs: A quarterback who will throw past the sticks (adot near 8-9 with a deep-ball hit rate above 50%) and a red-zone offense that scores rather than kicks; you do not need a running game or a big play count — SF won on 62 plays and 390 total yards.
Pattern: San Francisco builds a lead with a small number of efficient possessions, then stops pressing — it is 5-1 ATS-ish in result but has let week 3 (36-30), week 5 (32-29) and now this game get to one score late. The route back in is volume plus the flags SF hands you, not stopping its offense.
This week: Washington tried and had partial efficiency: +17.6 CPOE, 4 explosive passes, two touchdown drives of 56 and 66 yards in the second half. What it lacked was the finishing (2/4 in the red zone, 1-for-4 on fourth down) and any run game to make the clock work for it.
What an opponent needs: To actually cash this you need a pass offense that can stay on schedule for 12-14 play drives (WAS's 3-of-13 on third down is why it needed fourth downs), a red-zone TD rate near league average, and a pass rush — SF only allowed 2 sacks and 8.8% pressure, so the lead-protecting offense is rarely forced into mistakes.
When a team's engine-blended carry total assumes neutral script but the market has it as a 7+ point dog with a replacement lead back, cut carries toward 17-20 and add 6-8 attempts: WAS went 17/40 against a projected 27.5/32.5 and played 64 of 64 snaps trailing.
Trigger: Dog of 7+ whose rushing offense is below league ypc and whose starting back is ruled out.
Mobile-QB rushing props die to pressure, not just to script. Daniels ran 4 times for 10 with 3 scrambles for 11 while taking 4 sacks and 9 hits — the scramble yards became sack yards. Check the opponent's pressure rate from its recent personnel, not its season tag.
Trigger: QB rush-yard over priced off scramble volume against a front missing its star edge — if the interior (here Odighizuwa, Halton, Williams) is intact, the lanes close anyway.
'No pass rush' is the least sticky defensive tag in the dossier. SF carried it in weeks 3 and 4 at 0.094 and 0.045 pressure generated and then posted 28.9% sack-or-hit without Bosa.
Trigger: Any plan leaning on an opponent's two-week pressure drought; demand three-plus weeks and a personnel reason before pricing it.
Yards without touchdowns: WAS put up 300 passing yards, 353 total and 17 points with four red-zone trips. Receiving-yard overs cash while the team total and TD props lag.
Trigger: Offense with positive field EPA, negative red-zone EPA and a red-zone TD rate under 0.5 across multiple weeks — buy yardage, fade touchdowns and the team total.
Big early leads from this SF team compress: it has produced -0.219 second-half EPA and 7-11 flags a game in four of six weeks. The under can win while the dog covers — 40 points, a 6-point margin on a 7.5 line.
Trigger: SF (or a similar low-play, lead-protecting offense) laying 7+ with a double-digit halftime lead.
The short version
San Francisco scored on its first possession, led for every second after 10:58 of the first quarter, built it to 20-3 by halftime and then produced nothing after the 6:01 mark of the third. Washington out-threw its projection by 89 yards, scored twice in the second half and died twice inside the SF 20 — turnover on downs at the 13 in the second quarter, turnover on downs at the 17 with 2:00 left. Final 23-17: SF wins, SF doesn't cover 7.5, 40 points stays well under 51.5. The model's three market calls all hit; the player and team layers took their damage entirely on the Washington side of the ledger.
How it unfolded
SF's first two drives were 64 and 77 yards and were essentially two plays: Purdy to Mike Evans for 24 on 3rd-and-4, then Purdy to Evans for 54 to the WAS 18. Evans, a DNP all week with ribs, played 40% of the snaps and finished with 94 yards on five targets and a 39.4% air-yards share. The second drive survived because Purdy scrambled seven yards on 4th-and-3 at the WAS 11 (+3.10 EPA) — SF went 2-for-2 on fourth down, Washington 1-for-4. Washington's only answer in the half was a 27-yard McLaurin catch into a 51-yard field goal, and McLaurin was then lost on a Q1 2:16 sack.
Washington got its break — Luvu recovered a McCaffrey catch-fumble at the WAS 19, a -4.36 EPA play that took seven points off SF's board — and went four plays, eight yards, punt. SF answered with a 16-play, 89-yard, 6:13 drive that absorbed two offensive holdings and a 4th-and-1 sneak to make it 20-3 with eighteen seconds left in the half.
The second half was all Washington in possession and all stalemate in result. A 12-play, 56-yard drive with a converted 4th-and-5 to Diggs made it 23-10; an 11-play, 66-yard drive capped by a 9-yard throw to White made it 23-17 with 9:22 left. Then the two plays that settled it: McNichols' 31-yard touchdown run erased by a Chris Paul face mask at 4:19, and Daniels' incompletion to Burks on 4th-and-3 from the SF 17 at 2:00 — a 0.221 win-probability swing, the largest of the night.
Why the game diverged from the projection
The engine blended Washington to 62.3 plays at a 55.8% pass rate — 32.5 attempts, 27.5 carries, 114.9 rush yards. Washington ran 64 plays at 70.3% passing with 17 carries for 53 yards. Every one of those 64 snaps came while trailing; the pass_rate_by_state table has zero plays tied or leading. Part of that is pure script, but part is real: the 15 designed runs produced -0.175 EPA/rush with no 10+ gain, 0.8 yards a carry up the middle, and the one explosive run came back on a flag.
The pass-yard overshoot is the same mechanism twice over — volume plus efficiency. Daniels went 29-of-40 with +17.6 CPOE and 5-of-9 on deep balls against a secondary the inputs had rated as the hardest in the matchup to complete against. What did not happen was the quarterback run game: SF's front, without Bosa, hit him on 28.9% of dropbacks and took four sacks for -39 yards. The 66.7 projected rush yards became 10. San Francisco's own projection was essentially clean — 29 attempts, 29 carries, 62 plays, 390 yards — and missed only on points, because the fumble and three dead second-half drives cost it possessions, not efficiency.
The plan against the game
The plan's shape was right and one of its mechanisms was exactly backwards. SF leading early on passing and red-zone finishing, Washington walled off on the ground, the Commanders' pass rate climbing past 65%, average pace — all of that landed (checks: 121 plays vs 121.5 league, both leans held). But the plan's single highest-confidence lever, Daniels' legs against a thin edge rotation, inverted: the pressure arrived, the scrambles didn't, and the yardage the plan expected on the ground arrived through the air instead, breaking both U1 and D6 at once. The penalty read inverted too — one Washington pre-snap flag against eleven San Francisco penalties for 88 yards — but that one looks like the bounce, not the read.
Player by player
Okonkwo caught all seven of his targets for 69 yards on a 76% snap share; 34 of those yards were YAC, which is what a pressure valve looks like. Burks inherited McLaurin's field-stretching work (75 air yards, 28.1% share) and produced 66 yards and the fourth-down incompletion that ended it. Antonio Williams was the cleanest projection in the game — 3 catches on 4 targets against 2.9 and 4.2. White's projected carries became targets: 7 for 27 on the ground, 4 catches for 30 and the touchdown.
For SF, McCaffrey was the usage story — 16 carries for 64 with both goal-line scores on left guard, plus ten targets and nine catches for 53. Kittle drew a team-high eight targets on 88.7% of snaps. Evans' line is the lesson in low-volume, high-aDOT roles: five targets on a snap count, 94 yards.
The defenses
Charting for pressures and coverage hasn't landed, so read the proxies. San Francisco's front, supposedly rushless, generated four sacks and nine hits with Odighizuwa, Mykel Williams, Halton, Height and White sharing it — Washington's 89% shotgun rate and 7.8 aDOT say a quarterback getting the ball out and still getting hit. Washington's front held: SF managed 4.3 yards a carry with no explosive runs and put only three hits on Purdy. Both secondaries gave up four 20+ passes. The difference was at the goal line — SF 3-for-4 with +0.253 EPA inside the 20, Washington 2-for-4 with -0.408 while posting +0.083 between the 20s.
The blueprint
Washington's is now four weeks deep and loud: explosive passes over the top (four allowed in each of weeks 2, 3, 5 and here) and touchdowns conceded on trips inside the 20 (the red zone defense tag in four of five prior games). San Francisco had exactly the profile to cash it — 8.42 Y/A, +0.143 field EPA, 0.833 red-zone TD rate — and did, on 62 plays. On the other side, Washington's own failure is finishing, not movement: positive field EPA, negative red-zone EPA, 3-of-13 on third down.
San Francisco gets beaten the way Arizona and Seattle nearly beat it: take the yards between the 20s against a bend defense, collect its penalties, and survive until the lead-protecting offense goes dormant. Washington had the passing efficiency to try it and did, but it needed one more red-zone touchdown and one more third down, and it has neither the finishing rate nor the run game to buy them.
What the model should take from this
When a sub-league-average rushing offense is a 7+ point dog with its lead back out, the blended carry figure is fiction — cut toward 17-20 and move the attempts up. Mobile-QB rush props should be priced off realized pressure, not off the missing edge rusher: the scramble yards and the sack yards are the same budget. And 'no pass rush' is the least persistent tag in this dossier — two weeks of it bought SF a reputation it demolished in one game.
Commanders offenseagainst the49ers defense
Projected WAS offense output — equivalently, what the SF defense allows. The engine blends each offense's season-to-date rates with the defense across from it, anchored on the market's implied points.
| Backs | Car | Ru yds | Ru TD | Tgt | Rec | Rec yds | Rec TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RBLP | 10(7) | 32(27) | 0.2(0) | 2.1(5) | 1.8(4) | 11(30) | 0.1(1) |
| RBLP | 3(1) | 10(3) | 0.1(0) | 0.8(2) | 0.6(2) | 7(4) | 0(0) |
| RB | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| RBO | no projected volume | ||||||
| Receivers | Tgt | Rec | Yds | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WRLP | 4.7(1) | 3.0(1) | 42(27) | 0.3(0) |
| WRQ | 6.1(7) | 4.3(6) | 39(44) | 0.3(1) |
| WR | 4.2(4) | 2.9(3) | 29(50) | 0.2(0) |
| WRLP | 3.1(6) | 1.8(4) | 20(66) | 0.1(0) |
| WR | 2.8(1) | 1.7(1) | 17(6) | 0.1(0) |
| Tight ends | Tgt | Rec | Yds | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TE | 5.0(7) | 3.5(7) | 26(69) | 0.2(0) |
WAS offenserank of 32SF defenseEPA / play
Expected points added per play, garbage time excluded: the one-number read of an offense, and of what a defense allows.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Success rate
Share of plays that gain enough to stay on schedule.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Points / game
Points scored per game against points allowed per game.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Plays / game
Offensive snaps per game, a pace number: more plays means more volume to go around, not a better team.
Engine 62.3: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 60.8.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Pass rate
Share of snaps that are dropbacks: how the volume splits between the pass and the run.
Engine 56%: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 56%.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Explosive plays
Share of plays that go for a chunk: 20+ passing, 10+ rushing.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Third down
The offense's third-down conversion rate against the defense's third-down stop rate.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Red-zone TD rate
Touchdowns per trip inside the 20: finishing drives against the defense that bends or breaks.
Engine 55%: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 58%.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Giveaways / game
Turnovers the offense gives away per game against the ones the defense takes.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Flags / game
Accepted penalties per game committed by each unit.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
WAS offenserank of 32SF defenseRush EPA / carry
Expected points added per designed run, and per run allowed.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Rush yards / game
Rushing yards per game, gained and allowed.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Yards / carry
Rushing yards per carry: the offense's own against what the defense gives up, blended into the projection.
Engine 4.17: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 4.36.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Yards before contact
Yards before a defender touches the runner, per carry: the line-and-scheme share of the run game (PFR charting). Feeds each back's efficiency tilt.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
O-line grade
A composite of the line's pass protection and run blocking, offense only.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Box defenders
Average defenders the defense puts in the box on charted snaps (FTN). Ranked most to fewest with no good or bad: a heavy box crowds the run and dares the pass. Defense only; a look, not a grade.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
WAS offenserank of 32SF defensePass EPA / play
Expected points added per dropback, and per dropback allowed.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Pass yards / game
Passing yards per game, gained and allowed.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Yards / attempt
Passing yards per attempt, blended into the projection.
Engine 6.49: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 7.02.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Completion rate
Completions per attempt thrown, and per attempt faced.
Engine 61%: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 64%.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Passer rating
The quarterback rating the offense posts against the one the defense allows.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Sack rate
Sacks per dropback: taken by the offense, generated by the defense.
Engine 6.5%: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 6.4%.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Pressure rate
Sacks or quarterback hits per dropback, the play-by-play pressure proxy.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
INT rate
Interceptions per attempt: thrown by the offense, forced by the defense.
Engine 1.8%: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 2.2%.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Blitz
Offense: its EPA per dropback when the defense sends five or more rushers, higher is better. Defense: the share of its pass snaps it sends five or more, ranked most to least with no good or bad (FTN charting). Display only, not an engine input.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Yards / catch
Receiving yards per reception, offense only: where the ball goes once it is caught.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
DPI yards / game
Pass-interference yards per game: drawn by the receivers, committed by the secondary.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
49ers offenseagainst theCommanders defense
Projected SF offense output — equivalently, what the WAS defense allows. The engine blends each offense's season-to-date rates with the defense across from it, anchored on the market's implied points.
| Backs | Car | Ru yds | Ru TD | Tgt | Rec | Rec yds | Rec TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RBFP | 13(16) | 59(64) | 0.6(2) | 5.7(10) | 4.5(9) | 26(53) | 0.2(0) |
| RBDNP | 7(8) | 22(34) | 0.2(0) | 0.4(1) | 0.2(1) | 1(3) | 0(0) |
| FBFP | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 2.2(2) | 1.6(1) | 16(10) | 0.1(0) |
| Receivers | Tgt | Rec | Yds | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WRQ | 7.7(5) | 4.8(3) | 71(94) | 0.7(0) |
| WR | 2.8 | 1.9 | 30 | 0.2 |
| WR | 1.4 | 0.9 | 15 | 0.1 |
| WRFP | 1.7(0) | 1.1(0) | 4(0) | 0(0) |
| WR | 1.0(2) | 0.7(1) | 3(13) | 0(0) |
| WRO | no projected volume | |||
| Tight ends | Tgt | Rec | Yds | TD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TE | 6.7(8) | 5.0(5) | 47(69) | 0.5(1) |
SF offenserank of 32WAS defenseEPA / play
Expected points added per play, garbage time excluded: the one-number read of an offense, and of what a defense allows.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Success rate
Share of plays that gain enough to stay on schedule.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Points / game
Points scored per game against points allowed per game.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Plays / game
Offensive snaps per game, a pace number: more plays means more volume to go around, not a better team.
Engine 60.6: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 60.8.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Pass rate
Share of snaps that are dropbacks: how the volume splits between the pass and the run.
Engine 56%: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 56%.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Explosive plays
Share of plays that go for a chunk: 20+ passing, 10+ rushing.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Third down
The offense's third-down conversion rate against the defense's third-down stop rate.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Red-zone TD rate
Touchdowns per trip inside the 20: finishing drives against the defense that bends or breaks.
Engine 68%: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 58%.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Giveaways / game
Turnovers the offense gives away per game against the ones the defense takes.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Flags / game
Accepted penalties per game committed by each unit.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
SF offenserank of 32WAS defenseRush EPA / carry
Expected points added per designed run, and per run allowed.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Rush yards / game
Rushing yards per game, gained and allowed.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Yards / carry
Rushing yards per carry: the offense's own against what the defense gives up, blended into the projection.
Engine 4.05: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 4.36.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Yards before contact
Yards before a defender touches the runner, per carry: the line-and-scheme share of the run game (PFR charting). Feeds each back's efficiency tilt.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
O-line grade
A composite of the line's pass protection and run blocking, offense only.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Box defenders
Average defenders the defense puts in the box on charted snaps (FTN). Ranked most to fewest with no good or bad: a heavy box crowds the run and dares the pass. Defense only; a look, not a grade.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
SF offenserank of 32WAS defensePass EPA / play
Expected points added per dropback, and per dropback allowed.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Pass yards / game
Passing yards per game, gained and allowed.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Yards / attempt
Passing yards per attempt, blended into the projection.
Engine 7.40: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 7.02.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Completion rate
Completions per attempt thrown, and per attempt faced.
Engine 67%: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 64%.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Passer rating
The quarterback rating the offense posts against the one the defense allows.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Sack rate
Sacks per dropback: taken by the offense, generated by the defense.
Engine 5.1%: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 6.4%.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Pressure rate
Sacks or quarterback hits per dropback, the play-by-play pressure proxy.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
INT rate
Interceptions per attempt: thrown by the offense, forced by the defense.
Engine 2.3%: the blended per-game value the projection used for this game; the league average is 2.2%.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Blitz
Offense: its EPA per dropback when the defense sends five or more rushers, higher is better. Defense: the share of its pass snaps it sends five or more, ranked most to least with no good or bad (FTN charting). Display only, not an engine input.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
Yards / catch
Receiving yards per reception, offense only: where the ball goes once it is caught.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
DPI yards / game
Pass-interference yards per game: drawn by the receivers, committed by the secondary.
Ranks run 1 to 32 on each side, best first: green is a top-10 unit, amber a bottom-10 one.
The elevens, rated
Defenders colored by rating percentile within their position group (2026 wks 1-5 + ½·2025); the offense by production percentile among the position's starter pool. Linemen are unrated. Each defense is last game's snap leaders in a nickel base, minus this week's Out / Doubtful.
Who is listed
Everyone on the clubs' reports, the best-rated man first in his group: the designation, what is hurt, the practice line and the share of the snaps he took last game. Ratings are the same percentiles as the field above.