Colston Loveland or Travis Kelce?
Who to start in Week 4, 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 4 · 2026 season · Consensus updated October 5 at 6:11 AM EDT
Connect your league and an AI analyst settles debates like this one against your actual roster.
The lean
- This week: Travis Kelce
- Rest of season: even on the consensus — 5 of 8 experts
- Trade value: close to even
At least one measure is close to even. Your scoring, lineup and matchup can help separate them.
| Colston Loveland | Travis Kelce | |
|---|---|---|
| Rest of season 5 of 8 experts rank Colston Loveland ahead · 3 rank Travis Kelce ahead | TE7#4–#10 | TE7#5–#10 |
| Week 4 | TE17#11–#21 | TE5#4–#9edge |
| Week 4 projection (PPR) | 9.8 | 12.2edge |
| Market Index value (redraft PPR) | 10 #84 overall | 9 #94 overall |
| Last 30 days (Market Index) | -49 ranks · -1188 val | 0 ranks · 0 val |
| Rostered | 94% | 96% |
| Bye | 10 | 5 |
| Status | No injury designation | No injury designation |
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 4, Colston Loveland or Travis Kelce?
- Travis Kelce. This week's consensus has Colston Loveland at TE17 (range #11–#21) and Travis Kelce at TE5 (range #4–#9). Projections: 9.8 vs 12.2 PPR points.
- Who is better for the rest of the season, Colston Loveland or Travis Kelce?
- The experts have them effectively even for the rest of the season: Colston Loveland TE7 (range #4–#10) vs Travis Kelce TE7 (range #5–#10). 5 of 8 FantasyPros experts who rank both have Colston Loveland ahead for the rest of the season.
- Should I trade Colston Loveland for Travis Kelce?
- On the LeagueLogs Market Index (redraft PPR) Colston Loveland is ranked #84 overall and Travis Kelce #94, so a one-for-one is close to even. Run the exact deal through the free AI Trade Analyzer for a verdict on your league's scoring.