Usage Score
14.6
Player Dossier
2015-2019Nebraska
Kanawai Noa
WR • 6'0" • 200 lbs • Honolulu, HI, USA
Vertical playmakerExplosive finisher
Kanawai Noa reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
69.7
Consistency
54.3
Season Value
42.4
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2017 Regular Season · California
151617181819
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 2
- Seasons Tracked
- 6
- Program Path
- California • Nebraska
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Oregon
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.
Kanawai Noa, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2017 Regular Season · California. Kanawai Noa reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Kanawai Noa played WR for California and Nebraska. Across 5 tracked seasons, Kanawai Noa recorded 11 rushing yards, 1,496 receiving yards, and 6 tackles. His top tracked season came in 2017 with California.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2017 Regular Season
California paired 788 primary output with 81.9 efficiency.
Supporting note
2019 Regular Season role shape
target-driven usage with 69.7 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value cooled off
2019 Regular Season fell back from the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Multi-stop career journey
Production spans 2 team stops, with role shifts visible across California, Nebraska.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Wisconsin
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 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.
2019 Regular Season · Nebraska
Games
8
Receiving Yards / G
30.6
Efficiency
69.7
Usage
14.6
Consistency
54.3
Best Game by takeover score
Wisconsin
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.
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Colorado: 0. Northern Illinois: 51. Illinois: 5. Ohio State: 5. Northwestern: 13. Indiana: 52. Purdue: 47. Wisconsin: 72
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. Northern Illinois: 3 by 100. Illinois: 1 by 33.3. Ohio State: 1 by 33.3. Northwestern: 2 by 43.3. Indiana: 3 by 100. Purdue: 4 by 78.3. Wisconsin: 3 by 100
Split Comparison
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Wins23 · Games = 3 · -12.2 vs Losses
Losses35.2 · Games = 5 · +12.2 vs Wins
First Half15.3 · Games = 4 · -30.8 vs Second Half
Second Half46 · Games = 4 · +30.8 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
8 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
Wisconsin
Best efficiency game
100 vs Wisconsin
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 11/16 | vs Wisconsin | L 21-37 | — | 3 | 72 | 24 | 24 | 0 | 36 |
| Sat 11/2 | @ Purdue | L 27-31 | — | 4 | 47 | 11.8 | 11.80 | 0 | 34 |
| Sat 10/26 | vs Indiana | L 31-38 | — | 3 | 52 | 17.3 | 17.30 | 1 | 24 |
| Sat 10/5 | vs Northwestern | W 13-10 | — | 2 | 13 | 6.5 | 6.50 | 0 | 8 |
| Sat 9/28 | vs Ohio State | L 7-48 | — | 1 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
| Sun 9/22 | @ Illinois | W 42-38 | — | 1 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
| Sun 9/15 | vs Northern Illinois | W 44-8 | — | 3 | 51 | 17 | 17 | 1 | 27 |
| Sat 9/7 | @ Colorado | L 31-34 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
California
2015-2018
Opening stop
- 2
Nebraska
2019
Final stop
Season Progression
201520162017201820182019
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 Regular Season | California | 76 | 58.3 | 5.3 | — |
| 2016 Regular Season | California | 34 | 76.7 | 3.8 | -42 |
| 2017 Regular Season | California | 788 | 81.9 | 21.2 | 754 |
| 2018 Postseason | California | 353 | 76.6 | 18 | -435 |
| 2018 Regular Season | California | 353 | 76.6 | 18 | 0 |
| 2019 Regular Season | Nebraska | 245 | 69.7 | 14.6 | -108 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Oregon
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
126
Primary metric
126 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#2
Wisconsin
72
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
72 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#3
BYU
93
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
93 receiving yards with a 88.6 efficiency score.
#4
USC
110
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
110 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#5
Colorado
108
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
108 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2017 Regular Season · California
788 primary output · 81.9 efficiency · 21.2 usage
68.2
#2
2018 Postseason · California
51.7
353 primary · 76.6 efficiency · 18 usage
#3
2018 Regular Season · California
51.7
353 primary · 76.6 efficiency · 18 usage
Milestones
3
100+ receiving yards
0
8+ catch outings
1
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
5★
Class 2023 · Rating 0.9853
El Campo · El Campo, TX
- Committed To
- Texas A&M
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2023
Career Facts
2
Career teams
6
Seasons tracked
1,496
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 6 tracked seasons, 37 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.