David Montgomery for Kyle Pitts Sr. (2026)
Should I Trade... ?
See if your team wins or loses with this trade View Trade Analyzer
David Montgomery RB - HOU  David Montgomery RB - HOU | Kyle Pitts Sr. TE - ATL  Kyle Pitts Sr. TE - ATL |  | |
| Most Accurate Experts | |||
| Top ExpertsTop RB,TE ExpertsTop Player Experts |  See who the Most Accurate Experts would tradeUpgrade Now | ||
| Rankings | |||
| Rest of Season | # 60 | # 87 | - |
| Draft | ‐ | ‐ | - |
| Matchup | |||
| Opponent | vs. BUF | at PIT | - |
| Matchup Rating | This is a 4 star matchup. RBs perform a little better than their average vs BUF | This is a 3 star matchup. TEs perform close to their average vs PIT | - |
| Fantasy Points | |||
| Season Total | 142.9 | 122.8 | - |
| Avg Game | 8.4 | 7.2 | - |
| Schedule | |||
| SOS Rank | 11 | 19 | - |
| Misc | |||
| Injury Alert | ‐ | ‐ | - |
| Expert Ranks | |||
|
|
David Montgomery | Kyle Pitts Sr. | Add Player |
|
08/03 | #49 | #84 | - |
|
08/03 | #57 | #67 | - |
|
08/03 | #52 | #94 | - |
|
08/03 | #60 | #86 | - |
|
08/02 | #36 | #84 | - |
|
08/02 | #60 | #94 | - |
|
08/02 | #66 | #84 | - |
|
08/02 | #60 | #94 | - |
|
08/02 | #60 | #111 | - |
|
08/02 | #47 | #94 | - |
|
08/01 | #64 | #76 | - |
|
08/01 | #66 | #86 | - |
|
08/01 | #47 | #94 | - |
|
08/01 | #40 | #76 | - |
|
08/01 | #49 | #94 | - |
|
08/01 | #55 | #76 | - |
|
08/01 | #45 | #67 | - |
|
07/31 | #52 | #96 | - |
|
07/31 | #64 | #94 | - |
|
07/31 | #60 | #76 | - |
|
07/31 | #57 | #94 | - |
|
07/31 | #55 | #96 | - |
|
08/02 | #45 | #96 | - |
|
07/31 | #66 | #96 | - |
|
07/31 | #66 | #94 | - |
|
07/31 | #52 | #67 | - |
|
07/31 | #108 | #76 | - |
|
07/30 | #52 | #86 | - |
|
07/30 | #60 | #94 | - |
|
07/30 | #64 | #94 | - |
|
07/30 | #57 | #96 | - |
|
07/30 | #49 | #76 | - |
|
07/30 | #119 | #96 | - |
|
07/30 | #71 | #94 | - |
|
07/29 | #60 | #94 | - |
|
07/29 | #55 | #94 | - |
|
07/29 | #47 | #105 | - |
|
08/01 | #57 | #96 | - |
|
07/28 | #64 | #76 | - |
|
07/28 | #63 | #94 | - |
|
07/28 | #49 | #84 | - |
|
07/27 | #63 | #76 | - |
|
08/03 | #49 | #84 | - |
|
07/26 | #55 | #84 | - |
|
07/29 | #57 | #86 | - |
|
07/25 | #52 | #86 | - |
|
07/25 | #60 | #94 | - |
|
07/24 | #63 | #76 | - |
|
07/23 | #77 | #94 | - |
|
07/23 | #99 | #94 | - |
|
07/22 | #66 | #94 | - |
|
07/21 | #45 | #76 | - |
|
07/20 | #63 | #67 | - |
|
07/19 | #60 | #86 | - |
|
07/19 | #47 | #94 | - |
|
07/27 | #60 | #96 | - |
|
07/18 | #45 | #96 | - |
|
07/17 | #64 | #94 | - |
|
07/17 | #49 | #76 | - |
|
07/17 | #52 | #76 | - |
|
07/16 | #66 | #86 | - |
|
07/26 | #52 | #94 | - |
|
07/15 | #63 | #86 | - |
|
07/15 | #71 | #34 | - |
|
07/14 | #64 | #86 | - |
|
07/14 | #52 | #86 | - |
|
07/14 | #66 | #86 | - |
|
07/13 | #63 | #94 | - |
|
07/30 | #49 | #86 | - |
|
07/13 | #55 | #97 | - |
|
07/12 | #52 | #94 | - |
|
07/12 | #66 | #76 | - |
|
08/02 | #30 | #96 | - |
|
07/27 | #66 | #94 | - |
|
07/10 | #55 | #94 | - |
|
08/01 | #63 | #76 | - |
|
07/07 | #64 | #94 | - |
|
07/06 | #64 | #76 | - |
|
08/02 | #55 | #94 | - |
|
07/28 | #60 | #67 | - |
|
07/25 | #57 | #86 | - |
|
07/31 | #42 | #94 | - |
|
07/24 | #55 | #94 | - |
|
08/01 | #64 | #76 | - |
|
06/30 | #71 | #94 | - |
|
07/07 | #72 | #34 | - |
|
08/01 | #63 | #96 | - |
|
06/28 | #63 | #84 | - |
|
07/21 | #63 | #76 | - |
|
08/01 | #64 | #76 | - |
|
06/26 | #60 | #76 | - |
|
06/25 | #63 | #86 | - |
|
07/13 | #52 | #94 | - |
|
06/15 | #63 | #86 | - |
|
06/12 | #63 | #96 | - |
|
08/03 | #47 | #63 | - |
|
07/31 | #57 | #96 | - |
|
05/29 | #66 | #96 | - |
|
08/03 | #66 | #94 | - |
|
07/29 | #45 | #96 | - |
|
05/21 | #55 | #86 | - |
|
08/01 | #66 | #76 | - |
|
07/25 | #60 | #86 | - |
|
08/01 | #55 | #86 | - |
|
08/03 | #45 | #94 | - |
|
05/11 | #63 | #86 | - |
|
07/27 | #52 | #96 | - |
|
07/29 | #63 | #96 | - |
|
07/30 | #49 | #96 | - |
|
04/28 | #64 | #86 | - |
|
04/27 | #60 | #86 | - |
|
04/27 | #63 | #76 | - |
|
07/28 | #64 | #86 | - |
|
05/20 | #64 | #96 | - |
|
04/20 | #63 | #86 | - |
|
07/09 | #64 | #76 | - |
|
03/24 | #63 | #86 | - |
|
03/09 | #71 | #86 | - |
|
01/07 | #87 | #94 | - |
|
07/15 | #95 | #96 | - |
|
01/07 | #92 | #94 | - |
David Montgomery RB - HOU David Montgomery RB - HOU | Kyle Pitts Sr. TE - ATL Kyle Pitts Sr. TE - ATL | |
| 2026 Schedule | ||
| Week 1 | vs. BUF | at PIT |
| Week 2 | vs. CIN | vs. CAR |
| Week 3 | at IND | at GB |
| Week 4 | vs. DAL | at NO |
| Week 5 | at TEN | vs. BAL |
| Week 6 | at JAC | vs. CHI |
| Week 7 | vs. NYG | vs. SF |
| Week 8 | BYE WEEK | at TB |
| Week 9 | at LAC | vs. CIN |
| Week 10 | at CLE | vs. KC |
| Week 11 | vs. IND | BYE WEEK |
| Week 12 | vs. BAL | at MIN |
| Week 13 | at PIT | vs. DET |
| Week 14 | at WAS | at CLE |
| Week 15 | vs. JAC | at WAS |
| Week 16 | at PHI | vs. TB |
| Week 17 | at GB | vs. NO |
| Week 18 | vs. TEN | at CAR |
David Montgomery RB - HOU David Montgomery RB - HOU | Kyle Pitts Sr. TE - ATL Kyle Pitts Sr. TE - ATL | |
| 2025 Points | ||
| Week 1 | 4.3 | 5.9 |
| Week 2 | 12.1 | 3.7 |
| Week 3 | 28.4 | 3.9 |
| Week 4 | 1.2 | 13.0 |
| Week 5 | 17.2 | ‐ |
| Week 6 | 6.1 | 1.8 |
| Week 7 | 3.9 | 6.2 |
| Week 8 | ‐ | 5.9 |
| Week 9 | 9.0 | 3.8 |
| Week 10 | 9.1 | 3.8 |
| Week 11 | 3.7 | 1.4 |
| Week 12 | 3.7 | 2.5 |
| Week 13 | 10.8 | 8.2 |
| Week 14 | 13.3 | 9.0 |
| Week 15 | 9.2 | 34.6 |
| Week 16 | 1.4 | 11.7 |
| Week 17 | 4.0 | 1.6 |
| Week 18 | 5.5 | 5.8 |
| Total | 142.9 | 122.8 |
| Average | 8.4 | 7.2 |
David Montgomery RB - HOU David Montgomery RB - HOU | Kyle Pitts Sr. TE - ATL Kyle Pitts Sr. TE - ATL | |
| Expert | ||
| Pat Fitzmaurice FantasyPros | Kyle Pitts entered the 2025 season with the reputation of being a perennial fantasy tease. The former No. 3 overall draft pick tried to rehabilitate his image with 88 catches for 928 yards and five touchdowns last year, good for a TE2 finish in half-point PPR fantasy scoring. Pitts scored three of his five touchdowns and had his only 100-yard game of the season in Week 15, when he erupted for 11 catches, 166 yards and three scores vs. the Buccaneers. It was Pitts' best season since his 1,026-yard rookie campaign in 2021. The Falcons don't have a lot of firepower at wide receiver beyond Drake London, so Pitts could very well be Atlanta's No. 2 target earner this season. And while the QB duo of Michael Penix and Tua Tagovailoa doesn't seem very appealing, it's worth remembering that Mike Gesicki and Jonnu Smith had the best fantasy seasons of their careers with Tua as their primary QB. | |
| Derek Brown FantasyPros | David Montgomery now finds himself as the Texans' do it all workhorse for 2026. Last year, he was phased out of the Lions' offensive plans as the season moved along, which led to his RB32 finish in fantasy points per game. In Weeks 12-18, he was the RB43 in fantasy points per game with a 32.1% snap rate, 8.2 touches per game, and only 42.8 total yards per game. Montgomery still has the juice to produce as a workhorse this season. Last season, he ranked 30th in missed tackle rate, but he was 12th in yards after contact per attempt (per Fantasy Points Data). His receiving chops are also still alive and well, as he was also 22nd in yards per route run and 12th in first downs per route run. Many will worry that Montgomery will split Houston's backfield workload with Woody Marks this season, but I don't see that happening. Montgomery should absorb a workload close to what Joe Mixon saw in 2024. In 2024, Mixon ranked fifth in opportunity share, 14th in snap share, and 13th in carries among running backs, finishing with 281 touches. Last season, Montgomery bested Marks in explosive run rate, missed tackle rate, rushing success rate, yards after contact per attempt, and yards per route run. Legit, every per-touch metric that I care about. Montgomery is the superior back, even at this stage of his career, and he'll be a strong volume-driven RB2 that could flirt with RB1 production. | Last year, Kyle Pitts had a tale of two seasons. Yes, overall it was a wonderful year as the TE5 in fantasy points per game and easily his best statistical season since his rookie year, but it was wildly different with Drake London in and out of the lineup. Without London, Pitts had a 26.7% target share with 84.4 receiving yards per game, 2.81 yards per route run, a 27.8% first-read share, 0.120 first downs per route run, and 19 fantasy points per game (per Fantasy Points Data). Those are all elite numbers, and if Pitts had put up those stats all year, especially the fantasy points per game, he would have been the TE1 for fantasy. The problem is that with Drake London active, Pitts had a 19% target share, 42.2 receiving yards per game, 1.43 yards per route run, a 20.2% first-read share, 0.093 first downs per route run, and 9.6 fantasy points per game. All of those per route metrics were still quite strong, but the fantasy points per game mark would have made Pitts the TE20 last year. With Kevin Stefanski in town and a passing attack that boils down to London and Pitts at the top alongside Bijan Robinson, the reality of Pitts' 2026 projection falls somewhere in the middle of all of this. He's a strong TE1 that still has top-five upside if Tua Tagovailoa and Michael Penix Jr. can give Atlanta at least league-average quarterback play all season. |
