Usage Score
23
Player Dossier
2014-2016BYU
Nick Kurtz
WR • 6'6" • El Cajon, CA, USA
Vertical playmakerExplosive finisher
Nick Kurtz reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
70.1
Consistency
63.6
Season Value
64.2
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2016 Postseason · BYU
1415151616
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 5
- Program Path
- BYU
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Cincinnati
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.
Nick Kurtz, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2016 Postseason · BYU. Nick Kurtz reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2016 Postseason
BYU paired 541 primary output with 70.1 efficiency.
Supporting note
2016 Postseason role shape
target-driven usage with 70.1 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2016 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Wyoming
Win with an explosive receiving profile. It landed in the 66.7th 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.
2016 Postseason · BYU
Games
12
Receiving Yards / G
45.1
Efficiency
70.1
Usage
23
Consistency
63.6
Best Game by takeover score
Wyoming
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. Wyoming: 59. Arizona: 9. Utah: 35. UCLA: 83. West Virginia: 78. Michigan State: 27. Mississippi State: 62. Boise State: 16. Cincinnati: 33. Unknown: 69. Massachusetts: 20. Utah State: 50
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. Wyoming: 3 by 100. Arizona: 1 by 60. Utah: 3 by 77.8. UCLA: 8 by 69.2. West Virginia: 6 by 86.7. Michigan State: 3 by 60. Mississippi State: 7 by 59. Boise State: 2 by 53.3. Cincinnati: 4 by 55. Unknown: 5 by 92. Massachusetts: 3 by 44.4. Utah State: 4 by 83.3
Split Comparison
Wins37.1 · n=7 · -15.9 vs Losses
Losses53 · n=4 · +15.9 vs Wins
First Half48.5 · n=6 · +6.8 vs Second Half
Second Half41.7 · n=6 · -6.8 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
Wyoming
Best efficiency game
100 vs Wyoming
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thu 12/22 | @ Wyoming | W 24-21 | — | 3 | 59 | 19.7 | 19.70 | 0 | 39 |
| Sun 11/27 | vs Utah State | W 28-10 | — | 4 | 50 | 12.5 | 12.50 | 0 | 35 |
| Sat 11/19 | vs Massachusetts | W 51-9 | — | 3 | 20 | 6.7 | 6.70 | 0 | 8 |
| Sat 11/12 | vs Unknown | — | — | 5 | 69 | 13.8 | 13.80 | 1 | 31 |
| Sat 11/5 | @ Cincinnati | W 20-3 | — | 4 | 33 | 8.3 | 8.30 | 0 | 11 |
| Fri 10/21 | @ Boise State | L 27-28 | — | 2 | 16 | 8 | 8 | 0 | 11 |
| Sat 10/15 | vs Mississippi State | W 28-21 | — | 7 | 62 | 8.9 | 8.90 | 0 | 18 |
| Sat 10/8 | @ Michigan State | W 31-14 | — | 3 | 27 | 9 | 9 | 0 | 18 |
| Sat 9/24 | @ West Virginia | L 32-35 | — | 6 | 78 | 13 | 13 | 0 | 29 |
| Sun 9/18 | vs UCLAHigh volume | L 14-17 | — | 8 | 83 | 10.4 | 10.40 | 1 | 23 |
| Sat 9/10 | @ Utah | L 19-20 | — | 3 | 35 | 11.7 | 11.70 | 0 | 19 |
| Sun 9/4 | @ Arizona | W 18-16 | — | 1 | 9 | 9 | 9 | 0 | 9 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
BYU
2014-2016
Opening stop
Season Progression
20142015201520162016
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2014 Regular Season | BYU | 0 | — | — | — |
| 2015 Postseason | BYU | 578 | 80.1 | 13.8 | 578 |
| 2015 Regular Season | BYU | 578 | 80.1 | 13.8 | 0 |
| 2016 Postseason | BYU | 541 | 70.1 | 23 | -37 |
| 2016 Regular Season | BYU | 541 | 70.1 | 23 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Cincinnati
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
119
Primary metric
119 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#2
Nebraska
123
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
123 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#3
Wyoming
59
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
59 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#4
West Virginia
78
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
78 receiving yards with a 86.7 efficiency score.
#5
UCLA
83
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
83 receiving yards with a 69.2 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2016 Postseason · BYU
541 primary output · 70.1 efficiency · 23 usage
64.2
#2
2016 Regular Season · BYU
64.2
541 primary · 70.1 efficiency · 23 usage
#3
2015 Postseason · BYU
61.4
578 primary · 80.1 efficiency · 13.8 usage
Milestones
2
100+ receiving yards
1
8+ catch outings
1
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Career Facts
1
Career teams
5
Seasons tracked
1,119
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 5 tracked seasons, 24 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.