Usage Score
30.7
Player Dossier
2007-2010Western Michigan
Juan Nunez
WR • 6'1" • Miami, FL, USA
Alpha targetPossession profile
Juan Nunez reads as a alpha target based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
67.2
Consistency
67.7
Season Value
66.1
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2010 Regular Season · Western Michigan
0708080910
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 5
- Program Path
- Western Michigan
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Akron
Scouting Read
Best season and peak-game context are pinned here so the rest of the page can stay analytical without losing the headline story.
Juan Nunez, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2010 Regular Season · Western Michigan. Juan Nunez reads as a alpha target based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2010 Regular Season
Western Michigan paired 1,032 primary output with 67.2 efficiency.
Supporting note
2010 Regular Season role shape
target-driven usage with 67.2 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value is trending up
2010 Regular Season improved on the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Akron
Win with an explosive receiving profile. It landed in the 100th percentile of the selected season.
Analysis workspace
Season Workbench
Filter the strongest season sample, inspect game-level shape, and then drop into the full log without losing the story of the year.
Season Explorer
Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.
2010 Regular Season · Western Michigan
Games
12
Receiving Yards / G
86
Efficiency
67.2
Usage
30.7
Consistency
67.7
Best Game by takeover score
Bowling Green
Hover a point or expand a game row to keep the active game context visible here.
Game-by-Game Trend
123456789101112
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Michigan State: 54. Unknown: 50. Toledo: 100. Idaho: 21. Ball State: 71. Notre Dame: 103. Akron: 192. Northern Illinois: 44. Central Michigan: 133. Eastern Michigan: 110. Kent State: 59. Bowling Green: 95
Volume vs Efficiency
Low volume / high quality
High volume / high quality
Low volume / lower quality
High volume / lower quality
Volume on the x-axis, quality on the y-axis.
Volume versus efficiency scatter chart. Michigan State: 7 by 51.4. Unknown: 5 by 66.7. Toledo: 13 by 51.3. Idaho: 4 by 35. Ball State: 5 by 94.7. Notre Dame: 11 by 62.4. Akron: 6 by 100. Northern Illinois: 5 by 58.7. Central Michigan: 14 by 63.3. Eastern Michigan: 4 by 100. Kent State: 9 by 43.7. Bowling Green: 8 by 79.2
Split Comparison
Wins105.4 · n=5 · +29.6 vs Losses
Losses75.8 · n=6 · -29.6 vs Wins
First Half66.5 · n=6 · -39 vs Second Half
Second Half105.5 · n=6 · +39 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
12 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
Akron
Best efficiency game
100 vs Eastern Michigan
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fri 11/26 | @ Bowling GreenHigh volume | W 41-7 | — | 8 | 95 | 11.9 | 11.90 | 1 | 34 |
| Sat 11/20 | vs Kent StateHigh volume | W 38-3 | — | 9 | 59 | 6.6 | 6.60 | 0 | 14 |
| Sat 11/13 | vs Eastern Michigan100 receiving yards · 2+ TD | W 45-30 | — | 4 | 110 | 27.5 | 27.50 | 2 | 66 |
| Fri 11/5 | @ Central Michigan100 receiving yards · High volume | L 22-26 | — | 14 | 133 | 9.5 | 9.50 | 1 | 18 |
| Sat 10/30 | vs Northern Illinois | L 21-28 | — | 5 | 44 | 8.8 | 8.80 | 1 | 18 |
| Sat 10/23 | @ Akron100 receiving yards · 2+ TD | W 56-10 | — | 6 | 192 | 32 | 32 | 3 | 59 |
| Sat 10/16 | @ Notre Dame100 receiving yards · High volume | L 20-44 | — | 11 | 103 | 9.4 | 9.40 | 0 | 48 |
| Sat 10/9 | @ Ball State | W 45-16 | — | 5 | 71 | 14.2 | 14.20 | 1 | 32 |
| Sat 10/2 | vs Idaho | L 13-33 | — | 4 | 21 | 5.3 | 5.30 | 0 | 14 |
| Sat 9/18 | vs Toledo100 receiving yards · High volume | L 24-37 | — | 13 | 100 | 7.7 | 7.70 | 0 | 21 |
| Sat 9/11 | vs Unknown | — | — | 5 | 50 | 10 | 10 | 0 | 19 |
| Sat 9/4 | @ Michigan State | L 14-38 | — | 7 | 54 | 7.7 | 7.70 | 1 | 21 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Western Michigan
2007-2010
Opening stop
Season Progression
20072008200820092010
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 Regular Season | Western Michigan | 169 | 72.8 | 11.3 | — |
| 2008 Postseason | Western Michigan | 701 | 77.6 | 17.6 | 532 |
| 2008 Regular Season | Western Michigan | 701 | 77.6 | 17.6 | 0 |
| 2009 Regular Season | Western Michigan | 435 | 81.5 | 21.1 | -266 |
| 2010 Regular Season | Western Michigan | 1,032 | 67.2 | 30.7 | 597 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Akron
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
192
Primary metric
192 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#2
Michigan
151
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
151 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#3
Central Michigan
145
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
145 receiving yards with a 96.7 efficiency score.
#4
Northern Illinois
95
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
95 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#5
Central Michigan
133
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
133 receiving yards with a 63.3 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2010 Regular Season · Western Michigan
1,032 primary output · 67.2 efficiency · 30.7 usage
66.1
#2
2008 Postseason · Western Michigan
57.5
701 primary · 77.6 efficiency · 17.6 usage
#3
2008 Regular Season · Western Michigan
57.5
701 primary · 77.6 efficiency · 17.6 usage
Milestones
7
100+ receiving yards
7
8+ catch outings
4
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
2★
Class 2006 · Rating 0.7667
Miami Carol City · Opa Locka, FL
- Committed To
- Western Michigan
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2006
Career Facts
1
Career teams
5
Seasons tracked
2,337
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 5 tracked seasons, 34 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.