Head to Head

Updated June 3, 2026 from live stats

Austin Hooper vs Evan EngramWho should you start in 2026 fantasy football?

Evan Engram is the better fantasy start for 2026, averaging 4.9 PPG to Austin Hooper's 4.0 in 2025. Full head to head breakdown below.

The Bottom Line

Evan Engram is the better fantasy play this season.

Statistically, Evan Engram and Austin Hooper are interchangeable on a season-long basis. The 0.9-PPG gap is one broken play per game. For weekly start/sit calls, check opponent defense and recent form before defaulting to the name.

Low confidence: the production gap is narrow enough that weekly context matters more than the season line.

Want this verdict updated live on Sunday?

Track Austin Hooper and Evan Engram in the DraftCall app and get their updates the moment they change.

Get the App

TENew England Patriots#99

Austin Hooper

PPG

4.0

Games

Rec

Rec Yds

292

Rec TDs

Targets

Bye

Week 14

TEDenver Broncos#35PPG LEADER

Evan Engram

PPG

4.9

Games

Rec

Rec Yds

461

Rec TDs

Targets

Bye

Week 10

The Edge Chart

Austin Hooper

Evan Engram

Head to Head

4.0 PPG4.9 PPG

15 GP16 GP

Bye: Week 14Bye: Week 10

Fantasy Tiers

Austin Hooper: Tier 5 (Deep League) TE (ranked #99 at the position). Evan Engram: Tier 4 (Bench/Bye Fill) TE (ranked #35 at the position). Among the top 30 tight ends this season, Austin Hooper is producing at 18% of elite pace and Evan Engram at 22%. That ranking gap means Evan Engram carries more trade value and a higher draft cost in 2026.

Austin Hooper vs Evan Engram: The Full Breakdown

The gap between Austin Hooper and Evan Engram is smaller than most fantasy managers think. Separated by just 0.9 PPG in 2025, this is one of those tight end decisions that comes down to context, not name recognition. Austin Hooper averaged 4.0 PPG with the New England Patriots across 15 games, and Evan Engram posted 4.9 with the Denver Broncos in 16.

When two tight ends are separated by less than two points per game, the decision shifts to weekly context. Who has the softer defense? Who is trending up over the last month? Which team is projected for more total points? Those are the tiebreakers that actually matter.

Evan Engram is the volume tight end in this matchup with 50 receptions for 461 yards, while Austin Hooper profiles as a more touchdown-dependent spike play (1 scores on 32 catches). In weeks where Austin Hooper finds the end zone he out-scores Evan Engram, but the floor gap is real.

Austin Hooper has his bye in Week 14, and Evan Engram rests in Week 10. Managers rostering both need waiver wire depth at tight end for those two weeks, and that is exactly the kind of planning DraftCall's matchup engine surfaces automatically so you are not scrambling on a Sunday morning.

Trade Value + Dynasty Outlook

Both are in a similar trade value range. A straight swap would be fair in most leagues, with the tiebreaker going to whichever manager values schedule or bye week more. Dynasty outlook: Austin Hooper (age 27) is in the middle of his productive window. Stable dynasty value. Evan Engram (age 31) is in the later years of production. Still a redraft asset, but dynasty value is declining.

Did You Know?

•Evan Engram outscored Austin Hooper by a projected 15 total fantasy points over a full 17-game season.
•Evan Engram played 16 games in 2025 compared to Austin Hooper's 15. That durability gap means Evan Engram contributed more total fantasy points even before you look at per-game averages.
•Austin Hooper scored 1 total touchdowns in 2025 (0.1 per game), making him one of the more reliable scoring options at tight end.
•Evan Engram saw 76 targets in 2025. Target volume is the single strongest predictor of weekly PPR production at the tight end position.

Detailed Stat Breakdown

Austin Hooper vs Evan Engram: 2025 fantasy football stat comparison in the half-PPR scoring format.
Stat	Austin Hooper	Evan Engram
PPG (Half-PPR)	4.0	4.9
Games Played	15	16
Total Fantasy Pts (est.)	60	78
Receptions	32	50
Rec/Game	2.1	3.1
Receiving Yards	292	461
Rec Yds/Game	19.5	28.8
Receiving TDs	1	1
Targets	42	76
Target Share/Game	2.8	4.8
Age	-	31
Experience	-	8 yrs
Bye Week	Week 14	Week 10

Summary

The 2025 numbers favor Evan Engram at 4.9 PPG, 0.9 points per game above Austin Hooper's 4.0. But season stats only tell part of the story. DraftCall's AI factors in weekly matchup, recent form, and injury status to give you a verdict that updates with the latest data.

Website vs App

Get the AI verdict on Austin Hooper vs Evan Engram

DraftCall's AI analyzes matchup quality, recent trends, injury impact, and game script to give you a clear start/sit recommendation.

See everything in the app →

Launch List

Get the live verdict on Austin Hooper vs Evan Engram

The DraftCall app delivers live game-day verdicts on every matchup. Join the launch list and we will email you the day it goes live for the 2026 NFL season, with your direct iOS and Android install links.

We will never share your email. Unsubscribe anytime.

Frequently Asked Questions

Should I start Austin Hooper or Evan Engram in fantasy football?▾

Based on 2025 season averages, Evan Engram has the edge at 4.9 PPG compared to Austin Hooper's 4.0 PPG. However, the best start depends on weekly matchup, recent form, and injury status. DraftCall's app provides real-time AI-powered verdicts that factor in all of these variables.

How many fantasy points did Austin Hooper and Evan Engram average in 2025?▾

Austin Hooper averaged 4.0 fantasy points per game (half-PPR) across 15 games in 2025. Evan Engram averaged 4.9 PPG over 16 games. That is a difference of 0.9 points per game.

When are Austin Hooper and Evan Engram's bye weeks in 2026?▾

Austin Hooper (NE) has a bye in Week 14, and Evan Engram (DEN) has a bye in Week 10. Plan your roster accordingly if you are carrying both players.

Is Austin Hooper or Evan Engram a better fantasy tight end in 2026?▾

Evan Engram outscored Austin Hooper by 0.9 PPG in 2025, which gives him the edge heading into 2026. For a week-by-week verdict, DraftCall's AI analyzes matchup quality and recent trends in real time.