Players 2018 final

1

George Kittle

SF· 16 G

1377 Rec yards

2

Travis Kelce

KC· 16 G

1336 Rec yards

3

Zach Ertz

PHI· 16 G

1163 Rec yards

4

Jared Cook

LV· 16 G

896 Rec yards

5

Eric Ebron

IND· 16 G

750 Rec yards

Tight ends — 2018 · ranked by Rec yards

#	Player	Tm	G	Grade	Yds/gm	Rec/gm	Tgt/gm	Rec yds	Rec	TD	Y/R	Catch%	Tgt share	WOPR
1	George Kittle	SF	16	79	86.1	5.5	8.5	1377	88	5	15.6	64.7%	26.8%	0.58
2	Travis Kelce	KC	16	88	83.5	6.4	9.4	1336	103	10	13.0	68.7%	26.9%	0.59
3	Zach Ertz	PHI	16	82	72.7	7.2	9.8	1163	116	8	10.0	74.4%	25.8%	0.57
4	Jared Cook	LV	16	75	56.0	4.2	6.3	896	68	6	13.2	67.3%	18.4%	0.42
5	Eric Ebron	IND	16	77	46.9	4.1	6.9	750	66	13	11.4	60.0%	16.8%	0.41
6	Rob Gronkowski	NE	13	71	52.5	3.6	5.5	682	47	3	14.5	65.3%	16.0%	0.42
7	Austin Hooper	ATL	16	69	41.2	4.4	5.5	660	71	4	9.3	80.7%	14.3%	0.29
8	David Njoku	CLE	15	67	42.6	3.7	5.9	639	56	4	11.4	63.6%	16.5%	0.35
9	Jimmy Graham	GB	16	65	39.8	3.4	5.6	636	55	2	11.6	61.8%	13.9%	0.32
10	Kyle Rudolph	MIN	16	70	39.6	4.0	5.1	634	64	4	9.9	78.0%	14.3%	0.29
11	Vance McDonald	PIT	15	65	40.7	3.3	4.8	610	50	4	12.2	69.4%	11.4%	0.22
12	Evan Engram	NYG	11	73	52.5	4.1	5.8	577	45	3	12.8	70.3%	16.1%	0.32
13	Trey Burton	CHI	16	68	35.6	3.4	4.8	569	54	6	10.5	71.1%	15.1%	0.33
14	O.J. Howard	TB	10	72	56.5	3.4	4.8	565	34	5	16.6	70.8%	11.5%	0.26
15	Jordan Reed	WAS	13	67	42.9	4.2	6.5	558	54	2	10.3	64.3%	20.8%	0.43
16	Mark Andrews	BAL	16	62	34.5	2.1	3.1	552	34	3	16.2	68.0%	9.8%	0.24
17	Chris Herndon	NYJ	14	64	35.9	2.8	4.0	502	39	4	12.9	69.6%	11.7%	0.27
18	C.J. Uzomah	CIN	16	61	27.4	2.7	4.0	439	43	3	10.2	67.2%	12.2%	0.26
19	Jesse James	PIT	15	57	28.2	2.0	2.6	423	30	2	14.1	76.9%	6.1%	0.13
20	Benjamin Watson	NO	13	62	30.8	2.7	3.5	400	35	2	11.4	76.1%	11.0%	0.27
21	Vernon Davis	WAS	13	58	28.2	1.9	2.8	367	25	2	14.7	69.4%	8.7%	0.21
22	Ricky Seals-Jones	ARI	15	55	22.9	2.3	4.6	343	34	1	10.1	49.3%	15.6%	0.37
23	Dallas Goedert	PHI	15	61	22.3	2.2	2.9	334	33	4	10.1	75.0%	8.4%	0.18
24	Antonio Gates	LAC	16	52	20.8	1.8	2.8	333	28	2	11.9	62.2%	8.6%	0.19
25	Ian Thomas	CAR	10	63	33.3	3.6	4.9	333	36	2	9.2	73.5%	14.1%	0.28
26	Gerald Everett	LAR	15	57	21.3	2.2	3.3	320	33	3	9.7	66.0%	9.8%	0.19
27	Blake Jarwin	DAL	13	58	23.6	2.1	2.8	307	27	3	11.4	75.0%	7.6%	0.17
28	Ryan Griffin	HOU	13	50	23.5	1.8	3.3	305	24	0	12.7	55.8%	10.0%	0.21
29	Jordan Matthews	PHI	11	59	27.3	1.8	2.5	300	20	2	15.0	71.4%	7.0%	0.17
30	Tyler Higbee	LAR	14	52	20.9	1.7	2.4	292	24	2	12.2	70.6%	6.8%	0.14
31	Greg Olsen	CAR	9	63	32.3	3.0	4.2	291	27	4	10.8	71.1%	14.0%	0.34
32	Cameron Brate	TB	15	60	19.3	2.0	3.3	289	30	6	9.6	61.2%	8.7%	0.18
33	Jeff Heuerman	DEN	11	59	25.5	2.8	4.4	281	31	2	9.1	64.6%	12.4%	0.24
34	Rhett Ellison	NYG	13	51	20.9	1.9	2.6	272	25	1	10.9	73.5%	7.4%	0.15
35	Nick Vannett	SEA	15	54	17.9	1.9	2.9	269	29	3	9.3	67.4%	11.4%	0.22
36	Levine Toilolo	DET	11	55	23.9	1.9	2.2	263	21	1	12.5	87.5%	7.0%	0.15
37	Jason Croom	BUF	15	48	17.3	1.5	2.3	259	22	1	11.8	62.9%	7.8%	0.16
38	Jonnu Smith	TEN	12	56	21.5	1.7	2.5	258	20	3	12.9	66.7%	9.0%	0.18
39	Matt LaCosse	DEN	13	50	19.2	1.8	2.8	250	24	1	10.4	64.9%	7.8%	0.15
40	Jack Doyle	IND	6	66	40.8	4.3	5.5	245	26	2	9.4	78.8%	15.2%	0.32
41	Geoff Swaim	DAL	9	59	26.9	2.9	3.6	242	26	1	9.3	81.2%	11.6%	0.22
42	Jordan Akins	HOU	14	40	16.1	1.2	1.8	225	17	0	13.2	68.0%	5.6%	0.12
43	Anthony Firkser	TEN	9	56	25.0	2.1	2.2	225	19	1	11.8	95.0%	9.4%	0.20
44	James O'Shaughnessy	JAX	14	43	15.3	1.7	2.7	214	24	0	8.9	63.2%	8.6%	0.18
45	Nick Boyle	BAL	12	48	17.8	1.9	3.1	213	23	0	9.3	62.2%	9.4%	0.16
46	Virgil Green	LAC	14	45	15.0	1.4	1.9	210	19	1	11.1	70.4%	6.1%	0.12
47	Mike Gesicki	MIA	14	42	14.4	1.6	2.3	202	22	0	9.2	68.8%	8.2%	0.18
48	Josh Hill	NO	12	45	15.4	1.3	2.0	185	16	1	11.6	66.7%	5.9%	0.10
49	Charles Clay	BUF	11	46	16.7	1.9	3.3	184	21	0	8.8	58.3%	10.7%	0.22
50	Tyler Eifert	CIN	4	—	44.8	3.8	4.8	179	15	1	11.9	78.9%	12.0%	0.28
51	Lance Kendricks	GB	14	42	12.1	1.4	1.8	170	19	1	8.9	76.0%	4.8%	0.09
52	Luke Stocker	TEN	12	47	13.8	1.2	1.8	165	15	2	11.0	71.4%	6.8%	0.16
53	Demetrius Harris	KC	15	41	10.9	0.8	1.7	164	12	3	13.7	48.0%	4.3%	0.09
54	Hayden Hurst	BAL	9	50	18.1	1.4	2.6	163	13	1	12.5	56.5%	9.0%	0.19
55	Will Dissly	SEA	4	—	39.0	2.0	3.5	156	8	2	19.5	57.1%	11.6%	0.25
56	Dan Arnold	NO	7	53	21.4	1.7	2.7	150	12	1	12.5	63.2%	10.2%	0.24
57	Maxx Williams	BAL	10	47	14.3	1.6	1.7	143	16	1	8.9	94.1%	4.6%	0.08
58	Ed Dickson	SEA	9	54	15.9	1.3	1.4	143	12	3	11.9	92.3%	6.0%	0.11
59	Mo Alie-Cox	IND	8	52	16.6	0.9	1.6	133	7	2	19.0	53.8%	4.7%	0.12
60	Darren Fells	CLE	10	49	11.7	1.1	1.2	117	11	3	10.6	91.7%	3.4%	0.06

What this is. Finished box-score production from 2018, ranked by Rec yards. Per-game columns divide by games played, not games on the schedule, so a player who missed time is measured on the games he was in — and his season totals still show the games he missed. Minimum 4 games to be ranked, otherwise one big afternoon tops every list.

What it isn’t. None of this is a projection, a pick, or a prop recommendation — it is what already happened. Last season’s rate is a starting point for what a player does in a game, not a forecast of the next one: offense, role, and health all move underneath it. Target share and WOPR describe a player’s share of his own team’s passing game, so they compare roles, not players across teams.

About the grade. 0–100, where 50 is average for the position and 85+ is elite. It is box production, scaled by the defense it came against, pulled toward the positional average when a player has few games, then ranked within position — so a 90 quarterback and a 90 kicker are each elite for their own spot and are not comparable to each other in any other way. It needs 6 games, so players below that show — rather than a number built on a hot month.

What the grade can’t see. There is no charting behind it, so it rewards production over technique: the receiver who ran the route that freed someone else, and the back who picked up the blitz, get nothing for it. It is role-dependent by construction — a back on a run-heavy team gets more chances than an equally good back who touches it half as often. Kickers are not opponent-adjusted, because field goals are contested by distance and weather, not by the defense across the ball. And it grades a season already played; it is not a projection of the next one.

Regular season and postseason are kept separate on purpose. Playoff samples are small and the opponents are better; blending them into a season rate quietly flatters the players who got there. The grade is regular-season only, so it is not offered on the postseason split.