Who is better, Vinatieri or Hopkins?
Adam Vinatieri leads with a GOAT score of 85.9 against 85.9 for DeAndre Hopkins — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently scores Adam Vinatieri and DeAndre Hopkins level at 85.9. Adam Vinatieri leads on Longevity. DeAndre Hopkins leads on Peak, Dominance, Statistics.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Vinatieri wins: Longevity
Hopkins wins: Dominance, Peak, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/adam-vinatieri-vs-deandre-hopkins
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Vinatieri leads in 2 of 5 weighted categories.
Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.
| Ghost race · career day | 30 | 100 | 365 | 1000 | 1825 | 3650 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇸 Vinatieri | 0 | 0 | 120 | 235 | 472 | 1,078 |
| 🇺🇸 Hopkins | 0 | 0 | 802 | 2,012 | 5,865 | 10,581 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | VinatieriRetired | HopkinsActive |
|---|---|---|
| Super Bowl titles | 4 | — |
| Career points | 2,673 | — |
| Field goals made | 599 | — |
| Seasons played | 24 | — |
| Pro Bowls | 3 | 5 |
| Career receiving yards | — | 12,500 |
| First-team All-Pro selections | — | 3 |
| Career receptions | — | 984 |
| Receiving touchdowns | — | 83 |
| Dominance w25% | 80 | 82 |
| Peak w20% | 86 | 92 |
| Longevity w20% | 94 | 84 |
| Honours w20% | 82 | 82 |
| Statistics w15% | 90 | 92 |
Adam Vinatieri leads with a GOAT score of 85.9 against 85.9 for DeAndre Hopkins — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Hopkins scores higher on peak, dominance, statistics. Vinatieri leads on longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Vinatieri: 85.9, Hopkins: 85.9.
Make your case for Vinatieri vs Hopkins. The scoring is published in full — if you can point at the pillar or the weight you disagree with, we read it. Read the methodology paper.