Usage Score
8.3
Player Dossier
2008-2009Rutgers
Julian Hayes
WR • 6'1" • Malverne, NY, USA
Reliable chain-moverPossession profile
Julian Hayes reads as a reliable chain-mover based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
65
Consistency
63
Season Value
58.7
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2009 Regular Season · Rutgers
0809
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 2
- Program Path
- Rutgers
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Pittsburgh
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.
Julian Hayes, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2009 Regular Season · Rutgers. Julian Hayes reads as a reliable chain-mover based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2009 Regular Season
Rutgers paired 65 primary output with 65 efficiency.
Supporting note
2009 Regular Season role shape
target-driven usage with 65 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value is trending up
2009 Regular Season improved on the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Pittsburgh
Loss 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.
2009 Regular Season · Rutgers
Games
4
Receiving Yards / G
16.3
Efficiency
65
Usage
8.3
Consistency
63
Best Game by takeover score
South Florida
Hover a point or expand a game row to keep the active game context visible here.
Game-by-Game Trend
1234
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Cincinnati: 9. Unknown: 25. Pittsburgh: 27. South Florida: 4
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. Cincinnati: 1 by 60. Unknown: 2 by 83.3. Pittsburgh: 2 by 90. South Florida: 1 by 26.7
Split Comparison
Losses18 · n=2
First Half17 · n=2 · +1.5 vs Second Half
Second Half15.5 · n=2 · -1.5 vs First Half
All Games16.3 · n=4
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
4 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
Pittsburgh
Best efficiency game
90 vs Pittsburgh
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Rutgers
2008-2009
Opening stop
Season Progression
20082009
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2008 Regular Season | Rutgers | 9 | 60 | 4.3 | — |
| 2009 Regular Season | Rutgers | 65 | 65 | 8.3 | 56 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Pittsburgh
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
27
Primary metric
27 receiving yards with a 90 efficiency score.
#2
Unknown
25
Primary metric
Game with an explosive receiving profile.
25 receiving yards with a 83.3 efficiency score.
#3
Army
9
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
9 receiving yards with a 60 efficiency score.
#4
Cincinnati
9
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
9 receiving yards with a 60 efficiency score.
#5
South Florida
4
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
4 receiving yards with a 26.7 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2009 Regular Season · Rutgers
65 primary output · 65 efficiency · 8.3 usage
58.7
#2
2008 Regular Season · Rutgers
44.5
9 primary · 60 efficiency · 4.3 usage
Milestones
0
100+ receiving yards
0
8+ catch outings
0
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
2★
Class 2006 · Rating 0.7
Malverne · Malverne, NY
- Committed To
- Rutgers
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2006
Career Facts
1
Career teams
2
Seasons tracked
74
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 2 tracked seasons, 5 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.