Fourth & Inches

2026 regular · wk 4 · half ppr · 64 games lined

WR

Elic Ayomanor

TEN

WR116 · overall #265 · tier – · age 23

← back to rankings

Projected points

75

5.1/gm

Value over replacement

-34

repl 119

Range

31–119

sd 44

Week

4.6

@ BAL

Why this ranking

hand-set 2026-09-03

Cut 92.1 -> 75.0 at Matt's call, from the audit's buried-in-pool gate: draftable at WR83 while listed FIFTH in his own receiver room, with no ADP at all. A RATE CLAIM -- fantasy_points only; his 14.6 games carry no designation and are not in dispute. THE RATE WAS NEVER THE AGGRESSIVE PART. 6.31/g sits BELOW his own 6.00 half-PPR/g. What is implausible is the SNAP SHARE: 0.806 at depth 5, third in a room whose top two sit at 0.82. Tennessee's receivers sum to 4.76 snap shares, second in the league against a median of 3.19 -- the model fielding nearly five receivers a snap. THE DECIDING EVIDENCE IS WITHIN-TEAM, so it cannot be a systematic offset against Sleeper: we run 0.90x Sleeper on Tate and 0.86x on Robinson, the two starters, and 1.97x on him. A model simply projecting higher than Sleeper would not do that to one man in a room. 75.0 lands him just under Chimere Dike, the depth-4 receiver directly ahead of him, which is the internally coherent ordering the gate was asking for. Implied snap share falls to about 0.66, between Dike's 0.593 and Osborn's 0.663. RECORDED AGAINST ITS OWN COUNTER-ARGUMENT: ECR has him WR84 against our WR83, so the expert consensus AGREED with the number being cut. Underdog WR109, consensus WR113 and Sleeper's 46.7 points are the sources that did not. If ECR proves right, the thing that was wrong is depth_order 5 rather than this projection -- re-read it that way rather than re-cutting. BASIS CORRECTED 3 SEP. The comparison above originally quoted `obs_ppr_pg`, which is FULL PPR, against a projection the board computes in HALF PPR. Every such figure in this file has been replaced with the player's own half-PPR rate, measured from nflverse weekly data over his whole career. Receptions are the whole difference, so the error scaled with target volume and was largest for receivers.

This is a view, not a correction — the model said something different and was overruled. See how it works.

Projected usage

opportunity, before efficiency

Targets / game
4.1
Carries / game
0.1
Receptions / game
2.3
Rec yards / game
28
Rush yards / game
1
Rush TD / game
0.00
Rec TD / game
0.20
Total TD / game
0.20
Games projected
14.6
Observed pts/gm (history)
7.5
Games of history
16
Age multiplier
1.052
Usage carryover
0.90

Team context

what scales this projection

Neutral sec / play
35.4
Projected plays / game
59.5
Projected pass rate
58%
OL run block
-1.29
OL pass protection
-1.25
OL continuity
46%
2TE rate
21%
3WR rate
77%
1st-down pass rate
39%
Run friendly
+0.16
Scheme creativity
-0.30
Play action / motion
20% / 43%

Situation

ambiguity widens the projection range

Label
new head coach, committee
Ambiguity score
98
Effective contributors
4.85
Top player's share
30%
New play-caller
yes
Variance multiplier
2.55

Trade window

schedule-driven buy / sell timing

Action
avoid
Window weeks
4-6
Window opponents
BAL,HOU,IND
Window matchup
-0.58
Opponents after
CLE,CIN
After matchup
-0.48
Flip edge
-0.10
Buy basis
recent form
Bye week
9
Playoff schedule (15-17)
-0.13

2025 game log

full season · Standard

Games

16

Points

75.5

Per game

4.72

17-gm pace

80

Best / worst

11.6 / 0.5

Pace extrapolates the selected weeks over 17 games. It is what that stretch was worth, not a projection — no availability, matchup or regression adjustment is applied.

WkPtsRankTgtRecRe YdsRe TDAttRu Yds
11.3WR887213000
211.6WR206456100
39.8WR245438100
44.4WR497244000
51.8WR734218000
62.7WR605327000
72.9WR625229000
85.2WR448452000
94.6WR476346000
111.1WR876211000
130.5WR99515000
147.4WR293114100
151.7WR821117000
165.8WR384358000
179.7WR237437100
185.0WR3310350000