Player Stats

Nick Toon 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

Receiving yards
2,447
Receptions
171
Touchdowns
18

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesRecRec YdsTDOverall
2008 PostseasonWisconsin8227063.8
2008 Regular SeasonWisconsin815230163.8
2009 PostseasonWisconsin13226082.8
2009 Regular SeasonWisconsin1352779482.8
2010 PostseasonWisconsin9346077.5
2010 Regular SeasonWisconsin933413377.5
2011 PostseasonWisconsin139104188.5
2011 Regular SeasonWisconsin1355822988.5

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2011 Postseason

Wisconsin paired 926 primary output with 84.3 efficiency.

Supporting note

2011 Postseason role shape

target-driven usage with 84.3 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value stayed steady

2011 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: South Dakota

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 compare the statistical profile without scrolling through the full player page.

Season Explorer

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

2011 Postseason · Wisconsin

Games

13

Receiving Yards / G

71.2

Efficiency

84.3

Usage

30.2

Consistency

69.6

Best Game by takeover score

South Dakota

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. Oregon: 104. UNLV: 54. Oregon State: 69. Northern Illinois: 75. South Dakota: 155. Nebraska: 94. Michigan State: 58. Ohio State: 39. Purdue: 35. Minnesota: 100. Illinois: 67. Penn State: 42. Michigan State: 34

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. Oregon: 9 by 77. UNLV: 2 by 100. Oregon State: 7 by 65.7. Northern Illinois: 5 by 100. South Dakota: 7 by 100. Nebraska: 4 by 100. Michigan State: 2 by 100. Ohio State: 3 by 86.7. Purdue: 3 by 77.8. Minnesota: 8 by 83.3. Illinois: 6 by 74.4. Penn State: 5 by 56. Michigan State: 3 by 75.6

Split Comparison

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

Wins72.5 · Games = 10 · +5.5 vs Losses
Losses67 · Games = 3 · -5.5 vs Wins