Players 2024 final

1

Ja'Marr Chase

CIN· 17 G

1708 Rec yards

2

Justin Jefferson

MIN· 17 G

1533 Rec yards

3

Brian Thomas Jr.

JAX· 17 G

1282 Rec yards

4

Drake London

ATL· 17 G

1271 Rec yards

5

Amon-Ra St. Brown

DET· 17 G

1263 Rec yards

Wide receivers — 2024 · 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	Ja'Marr Chase	CIN	17	91	100.5	7.5	10.3	1708	127	17	13.4	72.6%	27.2%	0.63
2	Justin Jefferson	MIN	17	86	90.2	6.1	9.1	1533	103	10	14.9	66.9%	30.1%	0.71
3	Brian Thomas Jr.	JAX	17	77	75.4	5.1	7.8	1282	87	10	14.7	65.4%	25.5%	0.64
4	Drake London	ATL	17	74	74.8	5.9	9.3	1271	100	9	12.7	63.3%	28.2%	0.68
5	Amon-Ra St. Brown	DET	17	83	74.3	6.8	8.3	1263	115	12	11.0	81.6%	26.7%	0.62
6	Jerry Jeudy	CLE	17	66	72.3	5.3	8.5	1229	90	4	13.7	62.1%	22.6%	0.57
7	Malik Nabers	NYG	15	81	80.3	7.3	11.3	1204	109	7	11.0	64.1%	35.7%	0.85
8	CeeDee Lamb	DAL	15	78	79.6	6.7	10.1	1194	101	6	11.8	66.4%	28.2%	0.63
9	Ladd McConkey	LAC	16	69	71.8	5.1	7.0	1149	82	7	14.0	73.2%	24.6%	0.57
10	Jaxon Smith-Njigba	SEA	17	70	66.5	5.9	8.1	1130	100	6	11.3	73.0%	23.8%	0.56
11	Garrett Wilson	NYJ	17	70	64.9	5.9	9.0	1104	101	7	10.9	66.0%	25.8%	0.63
12	Terry McLaurin	WAS	17	72	64.5	4.8	6.9	1096	82	13	13.4	70.1%	23.3%	0.62
13	Courtland Sutton	DEN	16	69	67.6	5.1	8.4	1081	81	8	13.3	60.0%	25.9%	0.72
14	A.J. Brown	PHI	13	71	83.0	5.2	7.5	1079	67	7	16.1	69.1%	33.9%	0.84
15	Davante Adams	NYJ	14	73	75.9	6.1	10.1	1063	85	8	12.5	60.3%	29.6%	0.69
16	Zay Flowers	BAL	17	64	62.3	4.4	6.8	1059	74	4	14.3	63.8%	25.4%	0.57
17	Jakobi Meyers	LV	15	67	68.5	5.8	8.6	1027	87	4	11.8	67.4%	25.2%	0.60
18	Calvin Ridley	TEN	17	61	59.8	3.8	7.1	1017	64	4	15.9	53.3%	23.8%	0.66
19	Nico Collins	HOU	12	73	83.8	5.7	8.2	1006	68	7	14.8	68.7%	24.5%	0.60
20	Mike Evans	TB	14	75	71.7	5.3	7.9	1004	74	11	13.6	67.3%	25.0%	0.65
21	Jameson Williams	DET	15	65	66.7	3.9	6.1	1001	58	7	17.3	63.7%	18.7%	0.50
22	DK Metcalf	SEA	15	65	66.1	4.4	7.2	992	66	5	15.0	61.1%	20.8%	0.60
23	Darnell Mooney	ATL	16	62	62.0	4.0	6.6	992	64	5	15.5	60.4%	20.6%	0.54
24	Puka Nacua	LAR	11	76	90.0	7.2	9.6	990	79	3	12.5	74.5%	32.5%	0.70
25	Jauan Jennings	SF	15	67	65.0	5.1	7.5	975	77	6	12.7	68.1%	25.2%	0.59
26	DJ Moore	CHI	17	66	56.8	5.8	8.2	966	98	6	9.9	70.0%	27.1%	0.57
27	Tyreek Hill	MIA	17	64	56.4	4.8	7.2	959	81	6	11.8	66.4%	21.7%	0.60
28	Tee Higgins	CIN	12	79	75.9	6.1	9.1	911	73	10	12.5	67.0%	26.1%	0.63
29	George Pickens	PIT	14	62	64.3	4.2	7.4	900	59	3	15.3	57.3%	26.7%	0.71
30	Marvin Harrison Jr.	ARI	17	63	52.1	3.6	6.8	885	62	8	14.3	53.4%	22.6%	0.63
31	Jordan Addison	MIN	15	67	58.3	4.2	6.6	875	63	9	13.9	63.6%	21.2%	0.53
32	Jayden Reed	GB	17	61	50.4	3.2	4.4	857	55	6	15.6	73.3%	16.2%	0.34
33	DeVonta Smith	PHI	13	68	64.1	5.2	6.8	833	68	8	12.2	76.4%	28.0%	0.63
34	Alec Pierce	IND	16	59	51.5	2.3	4.3	824	37	7	22.3	53.6%	14.8%	0.42
35	Khalil Shakir	BUF	15	63	54.7	5.1	6.7	821	76	4	10.8	76.0%	23.0%	0.45
36	Michael Pittman	IND	16	60	50.5	4.3	6.9	808	69	3	11.7	62.2%	25.2%	0.55
37	Josh Downs	IND	14	65	57.4	5.1	7.6	803	72	5	11.2	67.3%	26.1%	0.50
38	Rashod Bateman	BAL	16	61	47.2	2.8	4.5	756	45	9	16.8	62.5%	16.9%	0.45
39	Keenan Allen	CHI	15	62	49.6	4.7	8.1	744	70	7	10.6	57.9%	26.5%	0.60
40	Jaylen Waddle	MIA	15	58	49.6	3.9	5.5	744	58	2	12.8	69.9%	16.3%	0.42
41	Rome Odunze	CHI	17	56	43.2	3.2	5.9	734	54	3	13.6	53.5%	18.9%	0.49
42	Quentin Johnston	LAC	15	62	47.4	3.7	6.1	711	55	8	12.9	60.4%	20.9%	0.49
43	Cooper Kupp	LAR	12	68	59.2	5.6	8.3	710	67	6	10.6	67.0%	24.9%	0.56
44	Wan'Dale Robinson	NYG	17	60	41.1	5.5	8.2	699	93	3	7.5	66.4%	25.1%	0.49
45	Ray-Ray McCloud	ATL	17	54	40.4	3.6	5.1	686	62	1	11.1	71.3%	16.3%	0.34
46	Deebo Samuel Sr.	SF	15	57	44.7	3.4	5.4	670	51	3	13.1	63.0%	18.8%	0.38
47	Tank Dell	HOU	14	58	47.6	3.6	5.8	667	51	3	13.1	63.0%	18.3%	0.46
48	Xavier Worthy	KC	16	59	39.9	3.7	6.1	638	59	6	10.8	60.2%	17.9%	0.44
49	DeMario Douglas	NE	16	57	38.8	4.1	5.4	621	66	3	9.4	75.9%	18.5%	0.37
50	Christian Watson	GB	14	53	44.3	2.1	3.8	620	29	2	21.4	54.7%	14.8%	0.44
51	Adam Thielen	CAR	10	64	61.5	4.8	6.2	615	48	5	12.8	77.4%	20.4%	0.48
52	DeAndre Hopkins	TEN	16	56	38.1	3.5	5.0	610	56	5	10.9	70.0%	14.5%	0.38
53	Jalen Tolbert	DAL	17	57	35.9	2.9	4.6	610	49	7	12.4	62.0%	12.6%	0.32
54	Romeo Doubs	GB	13	58	46.2	3.5	5.5	601	46	4	13.1	63.9%	19.7%	0.50
55	Tyler Lockett	SEA	17	52	35.3	2.9	4.4	600	49	2	12.2	66.2%	13.3%	0.34
56	Kayshon Boutte	NE	15	54	39.3	2.9	4.5	589	43	3	13.7	63.2%	15.6%	0.43
57	Josh Palmer	LAC	15	51	38.9	2.6	4.3	584	39	1	15.0	60.0%	14.6%	0.39
58	Chris Godwin Jr.	TB	7	71	82.3	7.1	8.9	576	50	5	11.5	80.6%	28.2%	0.62
59	Darius Slayton	NYG	16	50	35.8	2.4	4.4	573	39	2	14.7	54.9%	13.5%	0.37
60	Tutu Atwell	LAR	15	50	37.5	2.8	4.1	562	42	0	13.4	67.7%	13.9%	0.36

What this is. Finished box-score production from 2024, 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.