Player Stats

Hercules Mata'afa 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
84
TFL
29.5
Sacks
12.5
QB hurries
12

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesTacklesTFLSacksQB HurPDTDOverall
2014 Regular SeasonWashington State00-0--0-
2015 Regular SeasonWashington State00-0--0-
2016 PostseasonWashington State12211--064.7
2016 Regular SeasonWashington State12451147-064.7
2017 PostseasonWashington State102111-076.5
2017 Regular SeasonWashington State103516.56.54-076.5

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2017 Postseason

Washington State paired 30 primary output with 43.4 efficiency.

Supporting note

2017 Postseason role shape

impact-led usage with 43.4 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: Nevada

Win with backfield disruption leading the way. 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 · Washington State

Games

10

Havoc Plays / G

3

Efficiency

43.4

Usage

14.8

Consistency

62.7

Best Game by takeover score

Nevada

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.

12345678910

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Michigan State: 3. Montana State: 5. Boise State: 3.5. Nevada: 7. USC: 2. California: 4. Colorado: 1. Arizona: 2. Stanford: 2.5. Washington: 0

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. Michigan State: 2 by 38.3. Montana State: 5 by 70.8. Boise State: 6 by 60. Nevada: 3 by 62.5. USC: 5 by 40.8. California: 3 by 52.5. Colorado: 5 by 30.8. Arizona: 3 by 32.5. Stanford: 3 by 37.5. Washington: 2 by 8.3

Split Comparison

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

Wins3.5 · Games = 6 · +1.3 vs Losses
Losses2.3 · Games = 4 · -1.3 vs Wins