Who is better, Hopkins or Webster?
DeAndre Hopkins leads with a GOAT score of 85.9 against 85.8 for Mike Webster — 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 DeAndre Hopkins above Mike Webster: 85.9 vs 85.8. DeAndre Hopkins leads on Statistics, Dominance, Peak. Mike Webster leads on Honours, Longevity.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Hopkins wins: Dominance, Peak, Statistics
Webster wins: Longevity, Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/deandre-hopkins-vs-mike-webster
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Hopkins leads in 3 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇸 Hopkins | 0 | 0 | 802 | 2,012 | 5,865 | 10,581 |
| 🇺🇸 Webster | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 9 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | HopkinsActive | WebsterRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Career receiving yards | 12,500 | — |
| Pro Bowls | 5 | — |
| First-team All-Pro selections | 3 | — |
| Career receptions | 984 | — |
| Receiving touchdowns | 83 | — |
| Super Bowl titles | — | 4 |
| Pro Bowl selections | — | 9 |
| All-Pro first teams | — | 5 |
| Games played | — | 245 |
| Hall of Fame inductions | — | 1 |
| Dominance w25% | 82 | 80 |
| Peak w20% | 92 | 90 |
| Longevity w20% | 84 | 88 |
| Honours w20% | 82 | 88 |
| Statistics w15% | 92 | 84 |
DeAndre Hopkins leads with a GOAT score of 85.9 against 85.8 for Mike Webster — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Webster scores higher on honours, longevity. Hopkins leads on peak, dominance, statistics.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Hopkins: 85.9, Webster: 85.8.
Make your case for Hopkins vs Webster. 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.