2026 season · Week 5 · WR
Toss-up between Hollins and Golden in PPR. Too close to call: 11.2 vs 11.2 projected PPR points; a 24.5 implied team total vs 21.3; CHI allows the 5th-fewest WR points (early-season DvP is a weak signal). In standard scoring the call flips to Golden.
Mack HollinsNEWRvs LV11.4 PPR pts
Floor 3 · median 10.2 · ceiling 22
Too close to call: 11.2 vs 11.2 projected PPR points; a 24.5 implied team total vs 21.3; CHI allows the 5th-fewest WR points (early-season DvP is a weak signal).
Medium
Matthew GoldenGBWRvs CHI11.4 PPR pts
Floor 3 · median 10.1 · ceiling 22
Too close to call: 11.2 vs 11.2 projected PPR points; a 21.3 implied team total vs 24.5; CHI allows the 5th-fewest WR points (early-season DvP is a weak signal).
MediumAdd more players in Who Should I StartMack Hollins stats and usageMatthew Golden stats and usageAll Week 5 projections
Both players come from the same weekly projection: a mean and an 80% range from 2,000 simulated games, scored in your format, and the chance he plays. Start goes to the higher expected points (chance to play × projection); within 10% is a Flex-level close call. The tier ranks each player against everyone at his position this week. Reasons are templates filled with the model's numbers.
Updated Tue, Oct 6, 2:39 PM ETFull methodology
Toss-up between Hollins and Golden in PPR. Too close to call: 11.2 vs 11.2 projected PPR points; a 24.5 implied team total vs 21.3; CHI allows the 5th-fewest WR points (early-season DvP is a weak signal). In standard scoring the call flips to Golden.
Matthew Golden: his 90th-percentile outcome is 22 PPR points against 22 for Mack Hollins, from 2,000 simulated games each.
Matthew Golden: a floor (10th percentile) of 3 PPR points vs 3, and a 98% chance to play vs 98%.
PPR: Hollins 11.4, Golden 11.4; half-PPR: Hollins 9.4, Golden 9.5; standard: Hollins 7.3, Golden 7.6 (points if he plays).
