Fantasy Premier League

Differentials worth owning

A player nobody owns is not a differential on his own — most of them are players nobody owns for a reason. Every row here clears an ownership threshold and a minutes floor, is ranked on the model's own currency, and says how much of its edge is the projection and how much is only the field's absence.

The field's biggest blind spot

Alex Scott

MID · BOU · 6.1m · owned by 5.8%

+4.34

Edge

That is 17.0 projected points over the next 8 rounds, which is what the board under it is ranked on.

Gameweek 6 · 8-round window · feed of 01/10 11:39

Alex Scott is the best-projected player in the game owned by under 10%: 17.0 over 8 rounds at 6.1m, held by 5.8%.

Against Morgan Rogers, the most-owned player in his position at 41%, +1.69 of his edge is projection and +2.65 is the field he is not in — so 39% of the case for him is football rather than ownership.

Own

5.8%

The share of managers holding him, against the 10% gate this board opens at.

Proj edge

+1.69

What the model rates him over the most-owned player in his position. Positive is football; negative means the only case for him is that nobody owns him.

Own edge

+2.65

What the field's absence is worth at what the template is worth. The two halves add up to his whole edge.

The top five on this board

The board as your controls leave it — the same five that open the table below.

Ranked 1 Alex Scott

MID BOU vs

17.0 Ahead

Own

5.8%

Proj edge

+1.69

Own edge

+2.65

Against Morgan Rogers
3.0
1. CHE (A)
2. SUN (H)
3. MUN (A)
4. LEE (H)
5. IPS (A)
6. NFO (H)
7. FUL (A)
8. BHA (H)
Ranked 2 Anton Stach

MID LEE vs

16.7 Ahead

Own

2.5%

Proj edge

+1.44

Own edge

+2.90

Against Morgan Rogers
3.5
1. ARS (A)
2. MUN (H)
3. SUN (A)
4. BOU (A)
5. TOT (H)
6. CHE (A)
7. COV (H)
8. MCI (A)
Ranked 3 Marcus Tavernier

MID BOU vs

16.7 Ahead

Own

6.8%

Proj edge

+1.39

Own edge

+2.57

Against Morgan Rogers
3.0
1. CHE (A)
2. SUN (H)
3. MUN (A)
4. LEE (H)
5. IPS (A)
6. NFO (H)
7. FUL (A)
8. BHA (H)
Ranked 4 Vitaly Janelt

MID BRE vs

16.5 Ahead

Own

2.5%

Proj edge

+1.18

Own edge

+2.90

Against Morgan Rogers
3.3
1. AVL (A)
2. LIV (H)
3. HUL (A)
4. NFO (H)
5. BHA (A)
6. EVE (H)
7. MUN (A)
8. ARS (H)
Ranked 5 Granit Xhaka

MID SUN vs

16.1 Ahead

Own

3.6%

Proj edge

+0.87

Own edge

+2.81

Against Morgan Rogers
2.8
1. BHA (H)
2. BOU (A)
3. LEE (H)
4. COV (A)
5. CHE (H)
6. AVL (A)
7. TOT (H)
8. LIV (A)

Position

All GKP DEF MID FWD

Owned by under

10% 7% 5% 3%

Minutes played

Any 90+ 270+ 450+ 900+

At least

Any Very safe Safe Rotation risk

Rounds ahead

3 rounds 5 rounds 8 rounds

Price

Enter your squad to mark what you already own and what you could afford →

Showing 37 of 37 players 37 of 487 match your filters Clear filters

Player Price Pts Ahead Own Proj edge Own edge Start Next fixtures

1 Alex Scott MID vs BOU 6.1m 4.0 17.0 5.8% +1.69 +2.65 92%

CHE (A)
SUN (H)
MUN (A)
LEE (H)
IPS (A)
NFO (H)
FUL (A)
BHA (H)

1 Alex Scott 17.0

MID vs BOU · 6.1m · 5.8% 92%

Proj edge: +1.69
Own edge: +2.65
Pts: 4.0

Against Morgan Rogers

CHE (A)
SUN (H)
MUN (A)
LEE (H)
IPS (A)
NFO (H)
FUL (A)
BHA (H)

2 Anton Stach MID vs LEE 6.0m 3.7 16.7 2.5% +1.44 +2.90 92%

ARS (A)
MUN (H)
SUN (A)
BOU (A)
TOT (H)
CHE (A)
COV (H)
MCI (A)

2 Anton Stach 16.7

MID vs LEE · 6.0m · 2.5% 92%

Proj edge: +1.44
Own edge: +2.90
Pts: 3.7

Against Morgan Rogers

ARS (A)
MUN (H)
SUN (A)
BOU (A)
TOT (H)
CHE (A)
COV (H)
MCI (A)

3 Marcus Tavernier MID vs BOU 6.1m 3.9 16.7 6.8% +1.39 +2.57 92%

CHE (A)
SUN (H)
MUN (A)
LEE (H)
IPS (A)
NFO (H)
FUL (A)
BHA (H)

3 Marcus Tavernier 16.7

MID vs BOU · 6.1m · 6.8% 92%

Proj edge: +1.39
Own edge: +2.57
Pts: 3.9

Against Morgan Rogers

CHE (A)
SUN (H)
MUN (A)
LEE (H)
IPS (A)
NFO (H)
FUL (A)
BHA (H)

4 Vitaly Janelt MID vs BRE 5.0m 4.0 16.5 2.5% +1.18 +2.90 92%

AVL (A)
LIV (H)
HUL (A)
NFO (H)
BHA (A)
EVE (H)
MUN (A)
ARS (H)

4 Vitaly Janelt 16.5

MID vs BRE · 5.0m · 2.5% 92%

Proj edge: +1.18
Own edge: +2.90
Pts: 4.0

Against Morgan Rogers

AVL (A)
LIV (H)
HUL (A)
NFO (H)
BHA (A)
EVE (H)
MUN (A)
ARS (H)

5 Granit Xhaka MID vs SUN 5.5m 4.0 16.1 3.6% +0.87 +2.81 92%

BHA (H)
BOU (A)
LEE (H)
COV (A)
CHE (H)
AVL (A)
TOT (H)
LIV (A)

5 Granit Xhaka 16.1

MID vs SUN · 5.5m · 3.6% 92%

Proj edge: +0.87
Own edge: +2.81
Pts: 4.0

Against Morgan Rogers

BHA (H)
BOU (A)
LEE (H)
COV (A)
CHE (H)
AVL (A)
TOT (H)
LIV (A)

6 Enzo Le Fée MID vs SUN 5.7m 4.0 16.0 3.4% +0.76 +2.83 92%

BHA (H)
BOU (A)
LEE (H)
COV (A)
CHE (H)
AVL (A)
TOT (H)
LIV (A)

6 Enzo Le Fée 16.0

MID vs SUN · 5.7m · 3.4% 92%

Proj edge: +0.76
Own edge: +2.83
Pts: 4.0

Against Morgan Rogers

BHA (H)
BOU (A)
LEE (H)
COV (A)
CHE (H)
AVL (A)
TOT (H)
LIV (A)

7 Josh King MID vs FUL 5.5m 3.5 14.9 2.6% −0.35 +2.89 92%

IPS (A)
HUL (H)
COV (A)
AVL (A)
NEW (H)
MCI (A)
BOU (H)
TOT (A)

7 Josh King 14.9

MID vs FUL · 5.5m · 2.6% 92%

Proj edge: −0.35
Own edge: +2.89
Pts: 3.5

Against Morgan Rogers

IPS (A)
HUL (H)
COV (A)
AVL (A)
NEW (H)
MCI (A)
BOU (H)
TOT (A)

8 Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall MID vs EVE 6.6m 3.5 14.8 6.0% −0.40 +2.63 92%

HUL (A)
CHE (H)
ARS (A)
!
COV (H)
BRE (A)
LIV (H)
AVL (A)

8 Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall 14.8

MID vs EVE · 6.6m · 6.0% 92%

Proj edge: −0.40
Own edge: +2.63
Pts: 3.5

Against Morgan Rogers

HUL (A)
CHE (H)
ARS (A)
!
COV (H)
BRE (A)
LIV (H)
AVL (A)

9 Ethan Ampadu MID vs LEE 5.4m 3.4 14.8 0.9% −0.45 +3.02 92%

ARS (A)
MUN (H)
SUN (A)
BOU (A)
TOT (H)
CHE (A)
COV (H)
MCI (A)

9 Ethan Ampadu 14.8

MID vs LEE · 5.4m · 0.9% 92%

Proj edge: −0.45
Own edge: +3.02
Pts: 3.4

Against Morgan Rogers

ARS (A)
MUN (H)
SUN (A)
BOU (A)
TOT (H)
CHE (A)
COV (H)
MCI (A)

10 Matheus Cunha MID vs MUN 7.9m 3.6 14.4 5.8% −0.84 +2.65 92%

TOT (H)
LEE (A)
BOU (H)
CHE (A)
AVL (H)
LIV (A)
BRE (H)
NEW (A)

10 Matheus Cunha 14.4

MID vs MUN · 7.9m · 5.8% 92%

Proj edge: −0.84
Own edge: +2.65
Pts: 3.6

Against Morgan Rogers

TOT (H)
LEE (A)
BOU (H)
CHE (A)
AVL (H)
LIV (A)
BRE (H)
NEW (A)

11 Elliot Anderson MID vs MCI 6.3m 3.2 14.1 4.0% −1.10 +2.78 92%

LIV (A)
IPS (H)
AVL (A)
BHA (H)
NFO (A)
FUL (H)
ARS (A)
LEE (H)

11 Elliot Anderson 14.1

MID vs MCI · 6.3m · 4.0% 92%

Proj edge: −1.10
Own edge: +2.78
Pts: 3.2

Against Morgan Rogers

LIV (A)
IPS (H)
AVL (A)
BHA (H)
NFO (A)
FUL (H)
ARS (A)
LEE (H)

12 Youri Tielemans MID vs MUN 5.8m 3.5 14.0 1.5% −1.21 +2.97 92%

TOT (H)
LEE (A)
BOU (H)
CHE (A)
AVL (H)
LIV (A)
BRE (H)
NEW (A)

12 Youri Tielemans 14.0

MID vs MUN · 5.8m · 1.5% 92%

Proj edge: −1.21
Own edge: +2.97
Pts: 3.5

Against Morgan Rogers

TOT (H)
LEE (A)
BOU (H)
CHE (A)
AVL (H)
LIV (A)
BRE (H)
NEW (A)

13 Emiliano Buendía Stati MID vs AVL 5.9m 3.4 14.0 1.0% −1.28 +3.01 92%

BRE (H)
NEW (A)
MCI (H)
FUL (H)
MUN (A)
SUN (H)
IPS (A)
EVE (H)

13 Emiliano Buendía Stati 14.0

MID vs AVL · 5.9m · 1.0% 92%

Proj edge: −1.28
Own edge: +3.01
Pts: 3.4

Against Morgan Rogers

BRE (H)
NEW (A)
MCI (H)
FUL (H)
MUN (A)
SUN (H)
IPS (A)
EVE (H)

14 Alex Iwobi MID vs FUL 5.4m 3.3 13.8 0.7% −1.41 +3.03 92%

IPS (A)
HUL (H)
COV (A)
AVL (A)
NEW (H)
MCI (A)
BOU (H)
TOT (A)

14 Alex Iwobi 13.8

MID vs FUL · 5.4m · 0.7% 92%

Proj edge: −1.41
Own edge: +3.03
Pts: 3.3

Against Morgan Rogers

IPS (A)
HUL (H)
COV (A)
AVL (A)
NEW (H)
MCI (A)
BOU (H)
TOT (A)

15 Julio Enciso MID vs IPS 5.5m 3.5 13.8 0.8% −1.41 +3.03 92%

FUL (H)
MCI (A)
NFO (H)
HUL (A)
BOU (H)
TOT (A)
AVL (H)
COV (A)

15 Julio Enciso 13.8

MID vs IPS · 5.5m · 0.8% 92%

Proj edge: −1.41
Own edge: +3.03
Pts: 3.5

Against Morgan Rogers

FUL (H)
MCI (A)
NFO (H)
HUL (A)
BOU (H)
TOT (A)
AVL (H)
COV (A)

16 Harvey Barnes MID vs NEW 6.1m 3.3 13.8 5.7% −1.45 +2.65 92%

COV (A)
AVL (H)
CRY (A)
!
FUL (A)
ARS (H)
BHA (A)
MUN (H)

16 Harvey Barnes 13.8

MID vs NEW · 6.1m · 5.7% 92%

Proj edge: −1.45
Own edge: +2.65
Pts: 3.3

Against Morgan Rogers

COV (A)
AVL (H)
CRY (A)
!
FUL (A)
ARS (H)
BHA (A)
MUN (H)

17 Diego Gómez MID vs BHA 5.0m 3.2 13.7 4.0% −1.52 +2.78 92%

SUN (A)
CRY (H)
LIV (A)
MCI (A)
BRE (H)
HUL (A)
NEW (H)
BOU (A)

17 Diego Gómez 13.7

MID vs BHA · 5.0m · 4.0% 92%

Proj edge: −1.52
Own edge: +2.78
Pts: 3.2

Against Morgan Rogers

SUN (A)
CRY (H)
LIV (A)
MCI (A)
BRE (H)
HUL (A)
NEW (H)
BOU (A)

18 Keane Lewis-Potter MID vs BRE 5.5m 3.3 13.6 1.7% −1.66 +2.96 92%

AVL (A)
LIV (H)
HUL (A)
NFO (H)
BHA (A)
EVE (H)
MUN (A)
ARS (H)

18 Keane Lewis-Potter 13.6

MID vs BRE · 5.5m · 1.7% 92%

Proj edge: −1.66
Own edge: +2.96
Pts: 3.3

Against Morgan Rogers

AVL (A)
LIV (H)
HUL (A)
NFO (H)
BHA (A)
EVE (H)
MUN (A)
ARS (H)

19 Sandro Tonali MID vs TOT 5.3m 3.0 13.4 1.8% −1.87 +2.95 92%

MUN (A)
COV (H)
CHE (A)
CRY (H)
LEE (A)
IPS (H)
SUN (A)
FUL (H)

19 Sandro Tonali 13.4

MID vs TOT · 5.3m · 1.8% 92%

Proj edge: −1.87
Own edge: +2.95
Pts: 3.0

Against Morgan Rogers

MUN (A)
COV (H)
CHE (A)
CRY (H)
LEE (A)
IPS (H)
SUN (A)
FUL (H)

20 Rayan MID vs BOU 6.3m 3.1 13.4 1.6% −1.88 +2.97 92%

CHE (A)
SUN (H)
MUN (A)
LEE (H)
IPS (A)
NFO (H)
FUL (A)
BHA (H)

20 Rayan 13.4

MID vs BOU · 6.3m · 1.6% 92%

Proj edge: −1.88
Own edge: +2.97
Pts: 3.1

Against Morgan Rogers

CHE (A)
SUN (H)
MUN (A)
LEE (H)
IPS (A)
NFO (H)
FUL (A)
BHA (H)

21 Mohamed Belloumi MID vs HUL 5.1m 3.3 13.2 5.1% −2.03 +2.70 92%

EVE (H)
FUL (A)
BRE (H)
IPS (H)
ARS (A)
BHA (H)
CRY (A)
NFO (H)

21 Mohamed Belloumi 13.2

MID vs HUL · 5.1m · 5.1% 92%

Proj edge: −2.03
Own edge: +2.70
Pts: 3.3

Against Morgan Rogers

EVE (H)
FUL (A)
BRE (H)
IPS (H)
ARS (A)
BHA (H)
CRY (A)
NFO (H)

22 Florian Wirtz MID vs LIV 7.3m 3.2 13.2 5.7% −2.03 +2.65 92%

MCI (H)
BRE (A)
BHA (H)
ARS (H)
CRY (A)
MUN (H)
EVE (A)
SUN (H)

22 Florian Wirtz 13.2

MID vs LIV · 7.3m · 5.7% 92%

Proj edge: −2.03
Own edge: +2.65
Pts: 3.2

Against Morgan Rogers

MCI (H)
BRE (A)
BHA (H)
ARS (H)
CRY (A)
MUN (H)
EVE (A)
SUN (H)

23 John McGinn MID vs AVL 5.4m 3.2 13.1 2.2% −2.15 +2.92 92%

BRE (H)
NEW (A)
MCI (H)
FUL (H)
MUN (A)
SUN (H)
IPS (A)
EVE (H)

23 John McGinn 13.1

MID vs AVL · 5.4m · 2.2% 92%

Proj edge: −2.15
Own edge: +2.92
Pts: 3.2

Against Morgan Rogers

BRE (H)
NEW (A)
MCI (H)
FUL (H)
MUN (A)
SUN (H)
IPS (A)
EVE (H)

24 Adam Wharton MID vs CRY 5.4m 3.2 13.1 0.7% −2.17 +3.03 92%

NFO (H)
BHA (A)
NEW (H)
TOT (A)
LIV (H)
COV (A)
HUL (H)
CHE (A)

24 Adam Wharton 13.1

MID vs CRY · 5.4m · 0.7% 92%

Proj edge: −2.17
Own edge: +3.03
Pts: 3.2

Against Morgan Rogers

NFO (H)
BHA (A)
NEW (H)
TOT (A)
LIV (H)
COV (A)
HUL (H)
CHE (A)

25 Quinten Timber MID vs CRY 5.0m 3.2 13.1 0.0% −2.18 +3.09 88%

NFO (H)
BHA (A)
NEW (H)
TOT (A)
LIV (H)
COV (A)
HUL (H)
CHE (A)

25 Quinten Timber 13.1

MID vs CRY · 5.0m · 0.0% 88%

Proj edge: −2.18
Own edge: +3.09
Pts: 3.2

Against Morgan Rogers

NFO (H)
BHA (A)
NEW (H)
TOT (A)
LIV (H)
COV (A)
HUL (H)
CHE (A)

26 Daichi Kamada MID vs CRY 5.0m 3.2 13.1 0.5% −2.18 +3.05 92%

NFO (H)
BHA (A)
NEW (H)
TOT (A)
LIV (H)
COV (A)
HUL (H)
CHE (A)

26 Daichi Kamada 13.1

MID vs CRY · 5.0m · 0.5% 92%

Proj edge: −2.18
Own edge: +3.05
Pts: 3.2

Against Morgan Rogers

NFO (H)
BHA (A)
NEW (H)
TOT (A)
LIV (H)
COV (A)
HUL (H)
CHE (A)

27 Matt Grimes MID vs COV 4.9m 3.3 13.0 0.1% −2.21 +3.08 92%

NEW (H)
TOT (A)
FUL (H)
SUN (H)
EVE (A)
CRY (H)
LEE (A)
IPS (H)

27 Matt Grimes 13.0

MID vs COV · 4.9m · 0.1% 92%

Proj edge: −2.21
Own edge: +3.08
Pts: 3.3

Against Morgan Rogers

NEW (H)
TOT (A)
FUL (H)
SUN (H)
EVE (A)
CRY (H)
LEE (A)
IPS (H)

28 Lewis Miley MID vs NEW 5.5m 3.1 13.0 0.1% −2.27 +3.08 92%

COV (A)
AVL (H)
CRY (A)
!
FUL (A)
ARS (H)
BHA (A)
MUN (H)

28 Lewis Miley 13.0

MID vs NEW · 5.5m · 0.1% 92%

Proj edge: −2.27
Own edge: +3.08
Pts: 3.1

Against Morgan Rogers

COV (A)
AVL (H)
CRY (A)
!
FUL (A)
ARS (H)
BHA (A)
MUN (H)

29 Oscar Bobb MID vs FUL 5.5m 3.0 12.9 0.3% −2.39 +3.07 92%

IPS (A)
HUL (H)
COV (A)
AVL (A)
NEW (H)
MCI (A)
BOU (H)
TOT (A)

29 Oscar Bobb 12.9

MID vs FUL · 5.5m · 0.3% 92%

Proj edge: −2.39
Own edge: +3.07
Pts: 3.0

Against Morgan Rogers

IPS (A)
HUL (H)
COV (A)
AVL (A)
NEW (H)
MCI (A)
BOU (H)
TOT (A)

30 Regan Slater MID vs HUL 4.5m 3.2 12.8 5.2% −2.43 +2.69 92%

EVE (H)
FUL (A)
BRE (H)
IPS (H)
ARS (A)
BHA (H)
CRY (A)
NFO (H)

30 Regan Slater 12.8

MID vs HUL · 4.5m · 5.2% 92%

Proj edge: −2.43
Own edge: +2.69
Pts: 3.2

Against Morgan Rogers

EVE (H)
FUL (A)
BRE (H)
IPS (H)
ARS (A)
BHA (H)
CRY (A)
NFO (H)

31 Boubacar Kamara MID vs AVL 5.0m 3.1 12.7 0.3% −2.56 +3.07 92%

BRE (H)
NEW (A)
MCI (H)
FUL (H)
MUN (A)
SUN (H)
IPS (A)
EVE (H)

31 Boubacar Kamara 12.7

MID vs AVL · 5.0m · 0.3% 92%

Proj edge: −2.56
Own edge: +3.07
Pts: 3.1

Against Morgan Rogers

BRE (H)
NEW (A)
MCI (H)
FUL (H)
MUN (A)
SUN (H)
IPS (A)
EVE (H)

32 James McAtee MID vs NFO 5.5m 3.1 12.7 0.1% −2.56 +3.08 92%

CRY (A)
ARS (H)
IPS (A)
BRE (A)
MCI (H)
BOU (A)
CHE (H)
HUL (A)

32 James McAtee 12.7

MID vs NFO · 5.5m · 0.1% 92%

Proj edge: −2.56
Own edge: +3.08
Pts: 3.1

Against Morgan Rogers

CRY (A)
ARS (H)
IPS (A)
BRE (A)
MCI (H)
BOU (A)
CHE (H)
HUL (A)

33 Noah Sadiki MID vs SUN 4.9m 3.1 12.6 0.2% −2.68 +3.07 92%

BHA (H)
BOU (A)
LEE (H)
COV (A)
CHE (H)
AVL (A)
TOT (H)
LIV (A)

33 Noah Sadiki 12.6

MID vs SUN · 4.9m · 0.2% 92%

Proj edge: −2.68
Own edge: +3.07
Pts: 3.1

Against Morgan Rogers

BHA (H)
BOU (A)
LEE (H)
COV (A)
CHE (H)
AVL (A)
TOT (H)
LIV (A)

34 Harrison Armstrong MID vs EVE 5.0m 3.0 12.4 0.4% −2.80 +3.06 92%

HUL (A)
CHE (H)
ARS (A)
!
COV (H)
BRE (A)
LIV (H)
AVL (A)

34 Harrison Armstrong 12.4

MID vs EVE · 5.0m · 0.4% 92%

Proj edge: −2.80
Own edge: +3.06
Pts: 3.0

Against Morgan Rogers

HUL (A)
CHE (H)
ARS (A)
!
COV (H)
BRE (A)
LIV (H)
AVL (A)

35 Saša Lukić MID vs IPS 4.9m 3.0 11.9 0.1% −3.36 +3.08 92%

FUL (H)
MCI (A)
NFO (H)
HUL (A)
BOU (H)
TOT (A)
AVL (H)
COV (A)

35 Saša Lukić 11.9

MID vs IPS · 4.9m · 0.1% 92%

Proj edge: −3.36
Own edge: +3.08
Pts: 3.0

Against Morgan Rogers

FUL (H)
MCI (A)
NFO (H)
HUL (A)
BOU (H)
TOT (A)
AVL (H)
COV (A)

36 Dan Ndoye MID vs NFO 5.5m 2.7 11.1 0.7% −4.18 +3.03 92%

CRY (A)
ARS (H)
IPS (A)
BRE (A)
MCI (H)
BOU (A)
CHE (H)
HUL (A)

36 Dan Ndoye 11.1

MID vs NFO · 5.5m · 0.7% 92%

Proj edge: −4.18
Own edge: +3.03
Pts: 2.7

Against Morgan Rogers

CRY (A)
ARS (H)
IPS (A)
BRE (A)
MCI (H)
BOU (A)
CHE (H)
HUL (A)

37 Nilson Angulo MID vs SUN 5.0m 2.5 10.0 0.1% −5.21 +3.08 92%

BHA (H)
BOU (A)
LEE (H)
COV (A)
CHE (H)
AVL (A)
TOT (H)
LIV (A)

37 Nilson Angulo 10.0

MID vs SUN · 5.0m · 0.1% 92%

Proj edge: −5.21
Own edge: +3.08
Pts: 2.5

Against Morgan Rogers

BHA (H)
BOU (A)
LEE (H)
COV (A)
CHE (H)
AVL (A)
TOT (H)
LIV (A)

each row's Ahead, drawn to scale every bar on one axis of 0 to 20

What an edge is here, and what it is measured against

Every row is owned by under 10% of the game. The threshold is the page's premise rather than a sort: the ranking under it is the weighted score for the rounds ahead, which is a unit this model is measured in.

The two edge columns are one figure split in two, under the rule this app already trades points against ownership by — points times one minus 0.5 times ownership, which is the captain shortlist's own aggressive setting. They add up to the whole edge exactly, so a reader can check the pair rather than trust it.

The template is the most-owned player the game has in that position, taken off the whole board rather than off the filtered rows — a differential is measured against the field, not against the least contrarian row left on the screen. A position the game has published nobody's ownership for has no template, and both columns print a dash rather than a nought.

The minutes floor is the projection's own start probability at 45%. It is the largest way a list like this goes wrong, so it is a gate rather than a column — and nothing on this site backtests the ownership half of the split.

A player the game has published no ownership figure for is left off rather than counted as owned by nobody. Missing is not nought, and the one place that mistake does the most damage is a board about ownership.

Every ranking here is in expected points or in the weighted score for the rounds ahead, which are the units this model is measured in. The value column is those figures restated over a price — it is a way of scanning the board, and nothing on this site backtests it.

Bonus points are projected nowhere on this site, so they are in none of these figures.

The board is every player the game would let you field, the flagged included — whether a doubtful player is worth picking is a judgement the projection makes with his published chance of playing, not one made by hiding him.

What is measured here, and what is not

Measured The projected points

Replayed against gameweek 2 after it was played: an average miss of 1.617 points a player, against 1.842 for “predict what he has averaged so far”, over 456 players. Recorded Sunday, 6 September 2026 and refreshed by hand, so the date is part of the claim.