Who is better, Mitchell or Lamb?
Bobby Mitchell leads with a GOAT score of 81.6 against 81.5 for CeeDee Lamb — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Bobby Mitchell above CeeDee Lamb: 81.6 vs 81.5. Bobby Mitchell leads on Longevity, Honours. CeeDee Lamb leads on Peak, Statistics, Dominance.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Mitchell wins: Longevity, Honours
Lamb wins: Dominance, Peak, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/bobby-mitchell-vs-ceedee-lamb
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Mitchell 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇸 Mitchell | 0 | 0 | 55 | 118 | 353 | 664 |
| 🇺🇸 Lamb | 0 | 0 | 935 | 2,037 | 5,145 | 7,389 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | MitchellRetired | LambActive · Dallas Cowboys |
|---|---|---|
| NFL titles | 1 | — |
| Pro Bowl selections | 4 | — |
| Career all-purpose yards | 14,078 | — |
| Career touchdowns | 91 | — |
| Seasons played | 11 | — |
| Pro Bowls | — | 4 |
| Reception titles | — | 1 |
| Career receiving yards | — | 7,000 |
| 1,000-yard seasons | — | 4 |
| Receiving touchdowns | — | 45 |
| Dominance w25% | 78 | 80 |
| Peak w20% | 88 | 92 |
| Longevity w20% | 76 | 70 |
| Honours w20% | 82 | 78 |
| Statistics w15% | 86 | 90 |
Bobby Mitchell leads with a GOAT score of 81.6 against 81.5 for CeeDee Lamb — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Lamb scores higher on peak, dominance, statistics. Mitchell leads on honours, longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Mitchell: 81.6, Lamb: 81.5.
Make your case for Mitchell vs Lamb. 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.