← priced_lineedges · WNBA
2026-09-17
Day by day
Latest 1 graded days from the same CORE benchmark shown in the headline, charts and sheet: priced_lineedges.
28–23 · 55% · −2.48u across the last 1 days
09/1728–2355%−2.48u5 games
CON @ ATL7–10−3.36u
- DeWanna Bonner Over 7.5 PTS2 vs 7.5shots didn't fall — the read held upBonner's minutes (11) and usage rate (12%) were well below her typical load, limiting her scoring opportunities to just three field-goal attempts, of which she made only one.
- Rhyne Howard Over 19.5 PTS10 vs 19.5no clean explanationHoward shot just 3-14 from the field (21% FG) and 1-9 from three (11%), combining for a 32% true shooting percentage that fell well short of what was needed to reach 20 points even with 28 minutes played.
- Aaliyah Edwards Over 12.5 PTS7 vs 12.5paid over the fair numberEdwards shot just 3-8 from the field (37.5%) with only 16 minutes of action, limiting her scoring well short of the 12.5-point line. Four fouls in a blowout loss (-27) further restricted her opportunity to get back on track.
- DeWanna Bonner Over 6.5 PTS2 vs 6.5paid over the fair numberBonner was held to just 2 points on 1-3 shooting in limited 11-minute action, managing only 12% usage despite a positive +14 rating. The minimal volume and inefficient 33% true shooting were the clear culprits in missing the over by a wide margin.
- Rhyne Howard Over 17.5 PTS10 vs 17.5paid over the fair numberHoward's inefficiency at the rim doomed the over: she shot just 3-14 from the field (21%) and 1-9 from three (11%), combining for a dismal 32% TS despite adequate playing time and usage at 28 minutes and 27% usage rate.
- Rhyne Howard Over 18.5 PTS10 vs 18.5shots didn't fall — the read held upHoward's shot selection and efficiency collapsed: she went 3-14 from the field (21% FG) and 1-9 from three despite playing 28 minutes, leaving her 8.5 points shy of the over despite solid playmaking (8 ast, 4 stl).
LAS @ DAL8–8−2.18u
- Erica Wheeler Over 1.5 REB0 vs 1.5no clean explanation
- Cameron Brink Over 1.5 AST1 vs 1.5no clean explanation
- Dearica Hamby Over 1.5 AST1 vs 1.5paid over the fair number
- Jessica Shepard Under 10.5 REB11 vs 10.5 — missed by a hairno clean explanationShepard grabbed 11 boards in 28 minutes, just clearing the number despite modest 22% usage, as her team's +18 margin and defensive rebounding opportunities kept her in high-volume rebound situations.
- Rae Burrell Over 14.5 PTS12 vs 14.5no clean explanationBurrell shot just 5-14 from the field (36%) and 1-4 from three despite 24 minutes and 27% usage, falling two points short of the 14.5 line. Her inefficient shooting night, combined with limited free-throw attempts (1-1), prevented her from reaching the scoring threshold.
- Jessica Shepard Under 5.5 AST12 vs 5.5shots didn't fall — the read held upShepard's playmaking was the engine of her impact despite modest scoring, dishing 12 assists on 28 minutes of floor time while maintaining efficiency (55% TS%) and recording a team-leading +18, nearly doubling the 5.5 assist line. Her ball movement and high-volume involvement in the offense—facilitated by low foul trouble (2 PF)—drove her well above the projection.
LVA @ SEA4–2+0.77u
- A'ja Wilson Under 26.5 PTS29 vs 26.5 — missed by a hairpaid over the fair numberWilson's perfect 10-10 free-throw shooting and elite 69% two-point conversion (8-of-11) powered her to 29 points despite modest usage, as her 83% true shooting easily cleared the 26.5 line. She stayed out of foul trouble with just 3 PF in 29 minutes, allowing her to maintain high-efficiency offense throughout the game.
- Chelsea Gray Under 3.5 REB9 vs 3.5shots didn't fall — the read held upGray crashed the glass hard despite minimal offensive involvement, pulling down 9 rebounds in 26 minutes—more than double the projected total—as a primary rebounder in a game where Las Vegas controlled pace and rebounding opportunities.
PHO @ POR3–1+1.02u
- Alyssa Thomas Under 15.5 PTS18 vs 15.5shots didn't fall — the read held upThomas torched the under with efficient inside scoring, converting 6 of 8 from the field (75%) while getting to the free-throw line 10 times in 31 minutes, offsetting her zero three-pointers with dominant paint production.
WAS @ CHI6–2+1.28u
- Kamilla Cardoso Over 13.5 PTS10 vs 13.5paid over the fair numberCardoso's 10 points fell short of 13.5 despite solid volume (11 FG attempts), as she converted just 5 shots (45% FG) and took zero free throws in 23 minutes—a below-average efficiency night that couldn't overcome her limited offensive output. Four fouls in limited minutes also likely restricted her aggressive play late in the game.
- Kamilla Cardoso Over 12.5 PTS10 vs 12.5paid over the fair numberCardoso fell short of 12.5 despite solid volume (11 FG attempts), hampered by poor efficiency at 45.5% TS and zero free-throw attempts that limited her scoring upside. Foul trouble (6 PF in 23 minutes) likely curtailed her aggression and playing time in a blowout loss.
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.