Player Stats

Lonyae Miller 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

Scrimmage yards
2,153
Rushing yards
2,062
Receiving yards
91
Touchdowns
20

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesScrimmageRush YdsRec YdsTDOverall
2006 Regular SeasonFresno State1031728730237.9
2007 PostseasonFresno State1038380065.2
2007 Regular SeasonFresno State1059457123765.2
2008 PostseasonFresno State121131130267.9
2008 Regular SeasonFresno State126996990567.9
2009 PostseasonFresno State1312120041.3
2009 Regular SeasonFresno State1338034238441.3

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2008 Postseason

Fresno State paired 812 primary output with 61.9 efficiency.

Supporting note

2009 Postseason role shape

backfield-heavy usage with 48.5 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value stayed steady

2009 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: Cincinnati

Loss with 83 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value. 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.

2009 Postseason · Fresno State

Games

13

Scrimmage Yards / G

30.2

Efficiency

48.5

Usage

10.1

Consistency

39.7

Best Game by takeover score

Cincinnati

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. Wyoming: 12. UC Davis: 46. Wisconsin: 5. Boise State: 9. Cincinnati: 83. Hawai'i: 25. San José State: 43. New Mexico State: 2. Utah State: 1. Idaho: 6. Nevada: 79. Louisiana Tech: 61. Illinois: 20

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. Wyoming: 1 by 100. UC Davis: 8 by 59.9. Wisconsin: 2 by 26. Boise State: 2 by 46.9. Cincinnati: 12 by 76.9. Hawai'i: 6 by 43.4. San José State: 8 by 66.1. New Mexico State: 4 by 5.2. Utah State: 2 by 14.6. Idaho: 3 by 20.8. Nevada: 13 by 59.7. Louisiana Tech: 13 by 48.2. Illinois: 3 by 62.2

Split Comparison

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

Wins25.5 · Games = 8 · -12.1 vs Losses
Losses37.6 · Games = 5 · +12.1 vs Wins