Player Stats

James Thomas II College Stats

Career production, season-by-season totals, and the selected-season workbench are grouped here for stat-first searches.

Stat Footprint

Career production snapshot

Total offense
911
Passing yards
281
Rushing yards
630
Touchdowns
8

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesTotal OffensePass YdsRush YdsTDOverall
2006 Regular SeasonUTEP522022131.2
2007 Regular SeasonUTEP00000-
2008 Regular SeasonUTEP12485134351456.2
2009 Regular SeasonUTEP10581246226
2010 PostseasonUTEP1310010042.9
2010 Regular SeasonUTEP13336135201142.9

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2008 Regular Season

UTEP paired 485 primary output with 59.6 efficiency.

Supporting note

2010 Postseason role shape

pass-led usage with 46.3 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value stayed steady

2010 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: Tulsa

Loss with 87 yards of offense and 88.1 efficiency. It landed in the 100th percentile of the selected season.

Analysis workspace

Season Workbench

Filter the strongest season sample, inspect game-level shape, and compare the statistical profile without scrolling through the full player page.

Season Explorer

Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.

2010 Postseason · UTEP

Games

13

Primary Metric / G

26.6

Efficiency

46.3

Usage

11.7

Consistency

27.9

Best Game by takeover score

Tulsa

Hover a point or expand a game row to keep the active game context visible here.

Active game

Hover over a point

Hover or select a game to keep its context visible here without the page shifting around.

Game-by-Game Trend

Follow how the selected stat changes from one game to the next. Spikes mark standout outings, while dips show quieter weeks.

12345678910111213

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. BYU: 10. Arkansas-Pine Bluff: 6. Houston: 0. New Mexico State: 55. Memphis: 0. New Mexico: 1. Rice: 5. UAB: 1. Tulane: 37. Marshall: 29. SMU: 34. Arkansas: 81. Tulsa: 87

Volume vs Efficiency

Each dot is a game. Farther right means the player carried more of the workload, and higher means they were more efficient with those chances.

Low volumeHigh quality

High volumeHigh quality

Low volumeLower quality

High volumeLower quality

Volume on the x-axis, quality on the y-axis.

Volume versus efficiency scatter chart. BYU: 7 by 31.3. Arkansas-Pine Bluff: 2 by 30. New Mexico State: 5 by 50. New Mexico: 1 by 10. Rice: 1 by 50. UAB: 1 by 10. Tulane: 9 by 40.4. Marshall: 7 by 41.4. SMU: 5 by 85. Arkansas: 8 by 73.3. Tulsa: 10 by 88.1

Split Comparison

Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.

Wins16.8 · Games = 6 · -18.2 vs Losses
Losses35 · Games = 7 · +18.2 vs Wins