Player Stats

Steven Dunbar 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
2,430
Receptions
180
Touchdowns
11

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesRecRec YdsTDOverall
2014 PostseasonHouston6113046.7
2014 Regular SeasonHouston619273046.7
2015 PostseasonHouston12432053.2
2015 Regular SeasonHouston1227350353.2
2016 PostseasonHouston13223060.9
2016 Regular SeasonHouston1351669560.9
2017 PostseasonHouston1210197083.1
2017 Regular SeasonHouston1266873383.1

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2017 Postseason

Houston paired 1,070 primary output with 79.1 efficiency.

Supporting note

2017 Postseason role shape

target-driven usage with 79.1 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value stayed steady

2017 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: Fresno State

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

Season Explorer

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

2017 Postseason · Houston

Games

12

Receiving Yards / G

89.2

Efficiency

79.1

Usage

27.7

Consistency

61.1

Best Game by takeover score

Fresno State

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.

123456789101112

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Fresno State: 197. Arizona: 72. Rice: 57. Texas Tech: 83. Temple: 78. SMU: 65. Tulsa: 107. Memphis: 43. South Florida: 19. East Carolina: 171. Tulane: 36. Navy: 142

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. Fresno State: 10 by 100. Arizona: 6 by 80. Rice: 6 by 63.3. Texas Tech: 6 by 92.2. Temple: 6 by 86.7. SMU: 6 by 72.2. Tulsa: 10 by 71.3. Memphis: 7 by 41. South Florida: 3 by 42.2. East Carolina: 6 by 100. Tulane: 2 by 100. Navy: 8 by 100

Split Comparison

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

Wins86.3 · Games = 7 · -6.9 vs Losses
Losses93.2 · Games = 5 · +6.9 vs Wins