
Why: limited usage
vs HOU: allows 12.3 PPR/g to TE, rank 21/32 (Average). Trailing TE PPR allowed per game, weeks before 2026 W2. Descriptive context, never a model input.
Primary passer Joe Burrow. 2025 share of pass targets to TE (127/605). Descriptive context, never a model input.
2026 Week 1 consensus PPR projection (TE27), from tank01 getNFLProjections (consensus, PPR). Descriptive draft-prep context, not a start/sit call.
No prior games vs HOU in the record.
Snap %, target share and opportunities are descriptive usage: how the offense has deployed this player, not a forecast. Weeks shown: most recent 16.
TEschedule vs the rest of the league: 100 = league-average, >100 softer, <100 tougher; rank 1 = easiest of 32. Projected on 2025 defense. low-confidence early-season estimate. Descriptive context, not a start/sit call.
Given the conversations I had at camp, I think the Bengals' tight end room will start out as a three-player unit between All, Mike Gesicki and Drew Sample.
source ↗Given the conversations I had at camp, I think the Bengals' tight end room will start out as a three-player unit between All, Mike Gesicki and Drew Sample.
source ↗| Week | Opp | Tgt | Rec | ReYd | ReTD | Snap% | Tgt% | PPR | Half | Std |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 W1 | vs | 7 | 5 | 78 | 1 | 0% | 21% | – | – | – |
| 2025 W18 | vs | 2 | 2 | 13 | 0 | 38% | 5% | 3.3 | 2.3 | 1.3 |
| 2025 W17 | vs | 2 | 2 | 47 | 0 | 23% | 6% | 6.7 | 5.7 | 4.7 |
| 2025 W16 | @ | 4 | 3 | 35 | 1 | 48% | 13% | 12.5 | 11.0 | 9.5 |
| 2025 W15 | vs | 2 | 1 | 11 | 0 | 57% | 6% | 2.1 | 1.6 | 1.1 |
| 2025 W14 | @ | 6 | 6 | 86 | 1 | 42% | 17% | 20.6 | 17.6 | 14.6 |
| 2025 W13 | @ | 4 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 28% | 9% | 3.9 | 2.9 | 1.9 |
| 2025 W12 | vs | 6 | 4 | 35 | 0 | 43% | 18% | 7.5 | 5.5 | 3.5 |
| 2025 W6 | @ | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3% | 0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| 2025 W5 | vs | 5 | 2 | 15 | 0 | 50% | 13% | 3.5 | 2.5 | 1.5 |
| 2025 W4 | @ | 1 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 56% | 5% | 1.8 | 1.3 | 0.8 |
| 2025 W3 | @ | 3 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 30% | 12% | 1.6 | 1.1 | 0.6 |
| 2025 W2 | vs | 4 | 3 | 18 | 0 | 52% | 9% | 4.8 | 3.3 | 1.8 |
| 2025 W1 | @ | 3 | 1 | 14 | 0 | 31% | 13% | 2.4 | 1.9 | 1.4 |
| 2024 W18 | @ | 10 | 8 | 68 | 0 | 69% | 22% | 14.8 | 10.8 | 6.8 |
| 2024 W17 | vs | 12 | 10 | 86 | 0 | 57% | 25% | 18.6 | 13.6 | 8.6 |
| 2024 W16 | vs | 2 | 2 | 14 | 0 | 34% | 7% | 3.4 | 2.4 | 1.4 |
| 2024 W15 | @ | 4 | 3 | 37 | 0 | 32% | 12% | 6.7 | 5.2 | 3.7 |
Descriptive per-week usage and PPR output. Situational PBP cuts (red-zone, 3rd-down) and EPA/touch are planned for v2.
Based on 30 graded calls.
| Week | Opp | Call | Proj | Finish | Hit |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 W18 | SIT | 6.5 | TE39 (3.3) | ✓ | |
| 2025 W17 | SIT | 6.7 | TE26 (6.7) | ✓ | |
| 2025 W16 | SIT | 6.8 | TE12 (12.5) | ✗ | |
| 2025 W15 | SIT | 5.6 | TE51 (2.1) | ✓ | |
| 2025 W14 | SIT | 4.5 | TE2 (20.6) | ✗ | |
| 2025 W13 | SIT | 4.2 | TE34 (3.9) | ✓ | |
| 2025 W12 | SIT | 3.3 | TE18 (7.5) | ✓ | |
| 2025 W6 | SIT | 4.4 | TE63 (0.0) | ✓ | |
| 2025 W5 | SIT | 4.2 | TE37 (3.5) | ✓ | |
| 2025 W4 | SIT | 6.5 | TE48 (1.8) | ✓ |
✓ and ✗ grade where a player finished, not his points: a call hits when he finished startable (top-24 RB/WR, top-12 QB/TE), even if he came in under his projection. How we grade