What the expected-points record, the coverage data and the market say he is worth at 81.2 overall.
Jaxson Dart scored 241.58 fantasy points in 2025. The volume he earned was worth 225. That gap of 16.6 points is the single most important thing to understand before drafting him at 81.2 overall.
Rather than reading a season average, it is worth finding the point the season actually turned. Our shift detector flags in-season changes large enough to clear a statistical threshold, then asks what moved around them.
The largest single move was Week 5: passing yards went up from 37 to 196.5, at 3.8 standard deviations. The cause was structural — the offence around him got sharply better. He also missed Weeks 1, 11, 12, 14.
He finished 17.26 points per game on 86 targets, his first full season. Every part of that is real and none of it is in dispute.
What is worth separating is how much of it he earned. Expected points strip out the finishing and ask a narrower question: given the targets he drew, where they came from on the field, and how far downfield they travelled, what was that usage worth? For 2025 the answer was 225 points — 16.1 per game. He scored 16.6 more than that, a 7.4% overshoot.
4 of his 14 games produced 25 or more points: Week 7 against DEN (28.42), Week 9 against SF (27.24), Week 10 against CHI (26.28), Week 17 against LV (25.08). Strip them and the remaining 10 games average 13.5.
Spike weeks win fantasy games and a player who produces them is more valuable than one who never does — he is a ceiling play with real weeks off. 3 games came in under 10 points, including Week 2 against DAL (-0.3) and Week 3 against KC (0.3).
The three largest overshoots — Week 7 (+9), Week 10 (+8.1), Week 9 (+5.6) — are the same games. The spikes were not extra volume. They were finishing.
Not one of his 1 seasons is flagged as running hot. Across all 1 he has scored 16.6 points more than his usage was worth.
The reflexive read is regression. Finishing above expectation is unstable, and a player who does it repeatedly is usually one whose luck has not run out yet.
But an expected-points model has a specific blind spot, and it is worth naming: it converts usage at league-average rates. A target twenty yards downfield is worth what the average receiver does with a target twenty yards downfield. If a player is reliably better than average at winning a particular kind of target, he will beat the model every single year, and calling that luck is just mislabelling a skill.
So the question is not whether he beat the number. It is whether there is a mechanism.
Across 1,151 player-seasons we swept every stat for whether it predicts NEXT year's points, and kept only the ones that replicated in all five. f_teamImplLevel (r 0.146) carry.
So the figures worth weighing for him: , on the field for 83.6% of snaps. He finished 15 at the position — QB2.
Vegas sets an implied total for every team every week, and some offences beat theirs systematically. Over 103 games, NYG has come in -0.98 points against its own implied total, clearing it in 47% of weeks.
That is close to neutral — the offence performs about where the market expects, so there is no environment bonus or penalty to apply to him either way.
One related finding worth carrying: across 1,280 cases we measured what happens after a team's implied total slides, and the correlation is -0.37 — negative, meaning the market over-corrects. A falling team total is more often a buying window than a warning.
Our board has him at 334.2 points, 19.9 per game across 16.8 expected games — 0 catches, 0 yards, 0 touchdowns. That is QB3, 86 overall, and 13 points of value over a replacement starter.
It is a step down from 2025, and the reason is volume rather than efficiency. The projection assumes he keeps doing what he does on slightly fewer looks.
excellent rookie debut as a passer, specifically singled out (given the era of QB play the team just went through) as clearly the best QB play they've gotten in a long time — offense visibly fell apart on tape whenever he left the field. The real swing area: a tendency to take unnecessary extra hits fighting for extra yards rather than sliding, which the staff has reportedly made an explicit offseason emphasis specifically because they don't want to risk losing him over marginal yardage.
The books do not agree on him. . That 12.4-pick gap between ESPN and Underdog is the practical thing to act on: in a Underdog-priced room he is available later than his consensus number suggests.
He goes at 81.2 overall on consensus, and the books are far apart — 12.4 picks between cheapest and priciest, which is a real value window. He is latest on underdog and earliest on espn: sleeper 80.6, espn 75.6, yahoo 80.6, underdog 101, cbs 88.
At 81.2 you are paying a WR2 price for a player whose median outcome is a WR2 season with five weeks that win you the game outright and four that lose it. The bust rate of 20% is real and so is the 35% boom rate.
The call: fair value, not a discount. The reason to take him is the ceiling and the betting record. The reason to pass is that you are buying a profile that has beaten its expected output four years running and only needs to stop once.
Ask the Coach about Jaxson Dart Every number in this piece, plus your league's roster and scoring, in one answer.Expected points are computed from realised usage — targets, air yards and field position — against league-average conversion, not from projections. Prop records cover 30 graded lines. Projections are anchored to consensus with our engine applied as a capped tilt; the raw engine figure is stated where it differs. Nothing here is betting advice.