
Why: OUT · INJ gate
vs NYG: allows 33.4 PPR/g to WR, rank 9/32 (Soft). Trailing WR PPR allowed per game, weeks before 2026 W2. Descriptive context, never a model input.
Primary passer Matthew Stafford. 2025 share of pass targets to WR (364/578). Descriptive context, never a model input.
| Game | As | Site | Tgt | Rec | ReYd | ReTD | PPR | Half | Std |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 W17 | @ | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
Small sample (1 game). Defense roster/scheme turnover means the unit from prior seasons may differ significantly. Descriptive context only, never a model input or driver of the start/sit call.
Snap %, target share and opportunities are descriptive usage: how the offense has deployed this player, not a forecast. Weeks shown: most recent 16.
WRschedule 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.
- The Rams inactives included wide receiver Tutu Atwell, whom the Rams traded for late in training camp.
source ↗| Week | Opp | Tgt | Rec | ReYd | ReTD | Car | RuYd | Snap% | Tgt% | PPR | Half | Std |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 W18 | vs | 3 | 1 | 19 | 0 | – | – | 13% | 8% | 2.9 | 2.4 | 1.9 |
| 2025 W17 | @ | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | – | – | 20% | 3% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| 2025 W16 | @ | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | – | – | 9% | 0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| 2025 W15 | vs | 2 | 1 | 9 | 0 | – | – | 6% | 5% | 1.9 | 1.4 | 0.9 |
| 2025 W7 | @ | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | – | – | 14% | 0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| 2025 W5 | vs | 4 | 2 | 72 | 0 | – | – | 66% | 9% | 9.2 | 8.2 | 7.2 |
| 2025 W4 | vs | 2 | 1 | 88 | 1 | – | – | 28% | 5% | 15.8 | 15.3 | 14.8 |
| 2025 W3 | @ | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | – | – | 38% | 3% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| 2025 W2 | @ | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | – | – | 43% | 3% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| 2025 W1 | vs | 1 | 1 | 4 | 0 | – | – | 42% | 4% | 1.4 | 0.9 | 0.4 |
| 2024 W18 | vs | 8 | 5 | 37 | 0 | – | – | 55% | 20% | 8.7 | 6.2 | 3.7 |
| 2024 W17 | vs | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | – | – | 16% | 0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| 2024 W16 | @ | 2 | 1 | 12 | 0 | – | – | 21% | 11% | 2.2 | 1.7 | 1.2 |
| 2024 W15 | @ | 2 | 1 | 6 | 0 | – | – | 31% | 8% | 1.6 | 1.1 | 0.6 |
| 2024 W14 | vs | 3 | 3 | 45 | 0 | – | – | 45% | 10% | 7.5 | 6.0 | 4.5 |
| 2024 W13 | @ | 2 | 2 | 39 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 39% | 9% | 5.9 | 4.9 | 3.9 |
| 2024 W12 | vs | 3 | 3 | 30 | 0 | – | – | 27% | 9% | 6.0 | 4.5 | 3.0 |
| 2024 W11 | @ | 2 | 1 | 21 | 0 | – | – | 13% | 7% | 3.1 | 2.6 | 2.1 |
Descriptive per-week usage and PPR output. Situational PBP cuts (red-zone, 3rd-down) and EPA/touch are planned for v2.
Based on 27 graded calls.
| Week | Opp | Call | Proj | Finish | Hit |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 W18 | SIT | 2.2 | WR76 (2.9) | ✓ | |
| 2025 W17 | SIT | 3.3 | WR135 (0.0) | ✓ | |
| 2025 W16 | SIT | 4.0 | WR137 (0.0) | ✓ | |
| 2025 W15 | SIT | 5.1 | WR92 (1.9) | ✓ | |
| 2025 W7 | SIT | 4.8 | WR121 (0.0) | ✓ | |
| 2025 W5 | SIT | 3.8 | WR50 (9.2) | ✓ | |
| 2025 W4 | SIT | 4.8 | WR19 (15.8) | ✗ | |
| 2025 W3 | SIT | 3.8 | WR138 (0.0) | ✓ | |
| 2025 W2 | SIT | 4.4 | WR127 (0.0) | ✓ | |
| 2025 W1 | SIT | 4.5 | WR95 (1.4) | ✓ |
✓ 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