← priced_lineedges · WNBA
2026-08-20
Day by day
Latest 1 graded days from the same CORE benchmark shown in the headline, charts and sheet: priced_lineedges.
27–14 · 66% · +6.19u across the last 1 days
08/2027–1466%+6.19u3 games
ATL @ LAS5–6−2.42u
- Ariel Atkins Over 2.5 AST1 vs 2.5paid over the fair numberAtkins logged just 16 minutes with 24% usage, limiting her playmaking opportunities, and managed only 1 assist despite shooting efficiently (3-7 FG); the Wizards' blowout loss (-12 +/-) likely reduced her floor time and offensive touches in the second half.
- Dearica Hamby Over 13.5 PTS8 vs 13.5no clean explanationHamby's 3-7 shooting (43% FG) combined with zero 3-pointers attempted left her 5.5 points short despite playing 24 minutes, as her low 16% usage rate limited scoring opportunities in a lopsided game (−25 +/−).
- Rae Burrell Over 2.5 AST2 vs 2.5shots didn't fall — the read held upBurrell fell one assist short despite decent volume, finishing with only 2 dimes across 25 minutes on 29% usage; her 5 turnovers limited playmaking opportunities and she struggled to create for others in a blowout loss (-23 +/-).
- Dearica Hamby Over 2.5 AST2 vs 2.5shots didn't fall — the read held upHamby's playmaking was bottlenecked by limited offensive touches—her 16% usage rate and 24 minutes of action left insufficient opportunities to generate assists, and she finished with just 2 despite solid efficiency when she did get the ball.
- Erica Wheeler Over 4.5 AST0 vs 4.5shots didn't fall — the read held upWheeler's assist prop was torpedoed by her minimal role—just 17 minutes and 12% usage—which left her with zero dimes despite efficient scoring (2-3 FG, 2-2 3PT). The blowout loss (-17 +/-) likely limited her playmaking opportunities and floor time.
- Erica Wheeler Over 1.5 REB0 vs 1.5paid over the fair numberWheeler's 17 minutes and 12% usage rate severely limited her rebounding opportunities, and she failed to secure any boards despite her efficient scoring (4-of-5 FG). The under-the-radar role left no path to 1.5+ rebounds even with her efficient shooting night.
CON @ LVA7–2+3.26u
- Charlisse Leger-Walker Under 8.5 PTS10 vs 8.5no clean explanation
- A'ja Wilson Over 8.5 REB3 vs 8.5no clean explanationWilson's 27 minutes of action and early foul trouble (2 PF) limited her rebounding opportunities despite solid scoring efficiency, resulting in just 3 boards well short of the 8.5 target.
IND @ DAL15–6+5.35u
- Makayla Timpson Under 6.5 REB12 vs 6.5shots didn't fall — the read held upTimpson nearly doubled the line with 12 rebounds in 34 minutes, benefiting from heavy offensive rebounding activity and extended floor time in what appears to have been a closely contested game (+1 +/-). The under bet needed her to grab 6 or fewer boards, but her rebounding volume far exceeded that threshold despite modest scoring (11 pts on 15% usage).
- Alanna Smith Over 5.5 REB2 vs 5.5game script — blowout or foul troubleSmith was essentially a non-factor with just 10 minutes played and 5% usage, finishing with only 2 rebounds—likely due to limited court time and foul trouble (5 fouls) that kept her benched for stretches of the game.
- Paige Bueckers Under 6.5 AST8 vs 6.5no clean explanationBueckers exceeded the 6.5 assist line despite inefficient scoring (5-16 FG, 37% TS) because she played heavy usage minutes (35 min) and functioned as the primary ball-handler, recording 8 assists with zero turnovers. The under missed as she prioritized playmaking over scoring efficiency.
- Jessica Shepard Under 14.5 PTS26 vs 14.5shots didn't fall — the read held upShepard was exceptionally efficient from the field, shooting 11-16 (69%) and 1-1 from three, nearly doubling the projection despite modest usage at 26%. She played all 36 available minutes and stayed out of foul trouble with just 2 PF, allowing her to maintain the aggressive offensive role that generated her season-high output.
- Jessica Shepard Under 13.5 PTS26 vs 13.5shots didn't fall — the read held upShepard nearly doubled the projection by shooting 11-16 (69%) from the field with efficient inside scoring, far exceeding the volume and accuracy needed to clear 13.5 points. Her 36 minutes and 26% usage rate provided the opportunity, but the exceptional 67% true shooting—particularly the 2-1 margin in makes despite only 8 free-throw attempts—was the decisive factor.
- Jessica Shepard Under 12.5 PTS26 vs 12.5no clean explanationShepard's 26 points came on exceptional efficiency, shooting 11-16 from the field (69%) and 3-8 from free throw with minimal volume needed to exceed the 12.5-point line, compounded by her 36 minutes of playing time and 26% usage rate. She more than doubled the projection through elite shot selection and conversion rather than high-volume volume, making the under an easy miss on a night she simply couldn't miss from the floor.
Each eligible priced formula signal is normalized to a flat 1-unit outcome at its recorded price. Voids are excluded from the record, hit rate, and units. Open a day for the per-game split and loss review.