Player Stats

Christian 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

Tackles
56
TFL
15.5
Sacks
11
QB hurries
16
Passes defended
1

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesTacklesTFLSacksQB HurPDTDOverall
2014 Regular SeasonAlabama00-0--0-
2015 Regular SeasonAlabama00-0--0-
2016 PostseasonAlabama91-0--037.2
2016 Regular SeasonAlabama9152.524-037.2
2017 PostseasonAlabama4211--023.3
2017 Regular SeasonAlabama4410--023.3
2018 PostseasonAlabama14111--067.4
2018 Regular SeasonAlabama1433107121067.4

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2018 Postseason

Alabama paired 32 primary output with 32.6 efficiency.

Supporting note

2018 Postseason role shape

impact-led usage with 32.6 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value stayed steady

2018 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: Missouri

Win with 5.5 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet. 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.

2018 Postseason · Alabama

Games

14

Havoc Plays / G

2.3

Efficiency

32.6

Usage

9.5

Consistency

58.2

Best Game by takeover score

Missouri

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.

1234567891011121314

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Oklahoma: 2. Louisville: 0.5. Arkansas State: 1. Ole Miss: 5. Texas A&M: 3.5. Louisiana: 2. Arkansas: 3. Missouri: 5.5. Tennessee: 2. LSU: 4. Mississippi State: 1. The Citadel: 0.5. Auburn: 1. Georgia: 1

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. Oklahoma: 1 by 24.2. Louisville: 1 by 9.2. Arkansas State: 2 by 18.3. Ole Miss: 5 by 70.8. Texas A&M: 4 by 51.7. Louisiana: 4 by 36.7. Arkansas: 1 by 34.2. Missouri: 3 by 62.5. Tennessee: 2 by 28.3. LSU: 1 by 44.2. Mississippi State: 1 by 14.2. The Citadel: 4 by 21.7. Auburn: 2 by 18.3. Georgia: 3 by 22.5

Split Comparison

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

First Half2.4 · Games = 7 · +0.3 vs Second Half
Second Half2.1 · Games = 7 · -0.3 vs First Half