Carnell Tate or Jordan Addison?

Who to start in Week 5, who is better for the rest of the season, and who carries more trade value — from the FantasyPros expert consensus and the LeagueLogs Market Index.

Week 5 · 2026 season · Consensus updated October 10 at 12:11 PM EDT

Connect your league and an AI analyst settles debates like this one against your actual roster.

The lean

  • This week: Carnell Tate
  • Rest of season: Carnell Tate — 8 of 8 experts
  • Trade value: Carnell Tate

All three measures favor the same player. Your scoring, lineup and matchup still matter.

Carnell TateJordan Addison
Rest of season
8 of 8 experts rank Carnell Tate ahead · 0 rank Jordan Addison ahead
WR33#29–#38edgeWR47#43–#52
Week 5WR23#15–#27edgeWR34#24–#44
Week 5 projection (PPR)12.1edge9.9
Market Index value (redraft PPR)13 #65 overalledge9 #90 overall
Last 30 days (Market Index)+2 ranks · +35 val+16 ranks · +137 val
Rostered90%82%
Bye96
StatusQUESTIONABLE (Back) · -- → LIMIT → LIMIT · 0.90854% to playQUESTIONABLE (Hamstring) · DNP → LIMIT → LIMIT · 0.80124% to play

Expert consensus and ownership data via FantasyPros · Market Index values by LeagueLogs

Go deeper

More comparisons

Frequently Asked Questions

Who should I start in Week 5, Carnell Tate or Jordan Addison?
Carnell Tate. This week's consensus has Carnell Tate at WR23 (range #15–#27) and Jordan Addison at WR34 (range #24–#44). Projections: 12.1 vs 9.9 PPR points.
Who is better for the rest of the season, Carnell Tate or Jordan Addison?
Carnell Tate. Rest-of-season consensus: Carnell Tate WR33 (range #29–#38) vs Jordan Addison WR47 (range #43–#52). 8 of 8 FantasyPros experts who rank both have Carnell Tate ahead for the rest of the season.
Should I trade Carnell Tate for Jordan Addison?
On the LeagueLogs Market Index (redraft PPR) Carnell Tate is ranked #65 overall and Jordan Addison #90, so Carnell Tate carries more trade value and a one-for-one favors the side receiving him. Run the exact deal through the free AI Trade Analyzer for a verdict on your league's scoring.