Head to Head

Updated June 3, 2026 from live stats

Mack Hollins vs Mike EvansWho should you start in 2026 fantasy football?

Mike Evans is the better fantasy start for 2026, averaging 8.7 PPG to Mack Hollins's 6.0 in 2025. Full head to head breakdown below.

The Bottom Line

Mike Evans is the better fantasy play this season.

Mike Evans has the edge, but it is not a runaway. The 2.7-PPG advantage is real (8.7 to 6.0), and Mike Evans's 3 touchdowns show scoring upside. Mack Hollins is the buy-low candidate if recent production has dipped, because the talent gap is smaller than the numbers suggest.

Moderate confidence: stats favor the leader, but matchup variance could flip this weekly.

Want this verdict updated live on Sunday?

Track Mack Hollins and Mike Evans in the DraftCall app and get their updates the moment they change.

Get the App

WRNew England Patriots#99

Mack Hollins

PPG

6.0

Games

Rec

Rec Yds

550

Rec TDs

Targets

Bye

Week 14

WRTampa Bay Buccaneers#40PPG LEADER

Mike Evans

PPG

8.7

Games

Rec

Rec Yds

368

Rec TDs

Targets

Bye

Week 10

The Edge Chart

Mack Hollins

Mike Evans

Head to Head

6.0 PPG8.7 PPG

15 GP8 GP

Bye: Week 14Bye: Week 10

Fantasy Tiers

Mack Hollins: Tier 5 (Deep League) WR (ranked #99 at the position). Mike Evans: Tier 5 (Deep League) WR (ranked #40 at the position). Among the top 50 wide receivers this season, Mack Hollins is producing at 27% of elite pace and Mike Evans at 40%. That ranking gap means Mike Evans carries more trade value and a higher draft cost in 2026.

Mack Hollins vs Mike Evans: The Full Breakdown

Two wide receivers who will land on plenty of the same rosters in 2026. Mack Hollins (New England Patriots) finished the 2025 season averaging 6.0 fantasy points per game in 15 games. Mike Evans (Tampa Bay Buccaneers) came in at 8.7 PPG over 8 games. The gap is real but not insurmountable with the right matchup.

Mike Evans carries a 2.7-point PPG advantage from the 2025 season. That baseline matters, but it is one input among several. Matchup difficulty, scoring trends, and injury reports move the needle week to week, which is why the best answer changes depending on when you are asking.

Both are workload receivers with similar target shares. Mack Hollins turned 65 targets into 550 yards and 2 touchdowns, while Mike Evans converted 62 looks into 368 yards and 3 scores. When target volume is this close, game script and defensive matchup typically decide the weekly winner.

Bye weeks matter for roster construction: Mack Hollins sits Week 14 while Mike Evans is off Week 10. If you are deciding between the two as a season-long roster hold, the staggered byes actually work in your favor.

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: Mack Hollins (age 32) is in the later years of production. Still a redraft asset, but dynasty value is declining. Mike Evans (age 32) is in the later years of production. Still a redraft asset, but dynasty value is declining.

Did You Know?

•Mike Evans outscored Mack Hollins by a projected 46 total fantasy points over a full 17-game season.
•Mack Hollins played 15 games in 2025 compared to Mike Evans's 8. That durability gap means Mack Hollins contributed more total fantasy points even before you look at per-game averages.
•Mike Evans scored 3 total touchdowns in 2025 (0.4 per game), making him one of the more reliable scoring options at wide receiver.
•Mack Hollins saw 65 targets in 2025. Target volume is the single strongest predictor of weekly PPR production at the wide receiver position.

Detailed Stat Breakdown

Mack Hollins vs Mike Evans: 2025 fantasy football stat comparison in the half-PPR scoring format.
Stat	Mack Hollins	Mike Evans
PPG (Half-PPR)	6.0	8.7
Games Played	15	8
Total Fantasy Pts (est.)	90	70
Receptions	46	30
Rec/Game	3.1	3.8
Receiving Yards	550	368
Rec Yds/Game	36.7	46.0
Receiving TDs	2	3
Targets	65	62
Target Share/Game	4.3	7.8
Age	32	32
Experience	9 yrs	11 yrs
Bye Week	Week 14	Week 10

Summary

Based on 2025 production, Mike Evans holds the PPG edge with low-end output at 8.7 points per game. Mack Hollins averaged 6.0 PPG. Season averages are a starting point, not the final word. For a full AI analysis factoring matchup quality, recent form, injury impact, and game script, download DraftCall and get a verdict backed by real data.

Website vs App

Get the AI verdict on Mack Hollins vs Mike Evans

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 Mack Hollins vs Mike Evans

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 Mack Hollins or Mike Evans in fantasy football?▾

Based on 2025 season averages, Mike Evans has the edge at 8.7 PPG compared to Mack Hollins's 6.0 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 Mack Hollins and Mike Evans average in 2025?▾

Mack Hollins averaged 6.0 fantasy points per game (half-PPR) across 15 games in 2025. Mike Evans averaged 8.7 PPG over 8 games. That is a difference of 2.7 points per game.

When are Mack Hollins and Mike Evans's bye weeks in 2026?▾

Mack Hollins (NE) has a bye in Week 14, and Mike Evans (TB) has a bye in Week 10. Plan your roster accordingly if you are carrying both players.

Is Mack Hollins or Mike Evans a better fantasy wide receiver in 2026?▾

Mike Evans outscored Mack Hollins by 2.7 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.