Usage Score
9
Player Dossier
2015-2017Purdue
WR • 6'3" • 210 lbs • Paris, France
Anthony Mahoungou reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Usage Score
9
Efficiency
46.3
Consistency
33.5
Season Value
26.6
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2017 Postseason · Purdue
Snapshot
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.
Anthony Mahoungou, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2017 Postseason · Purdue. Anthony Mahoungou reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2017 Postseason
Purdue paired 678 primary output with 83.6 efficiency.
Supporting note
2016 Regular Season role shape
target-driven usage with 46.3 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: Northwestern
Loss with an explosive receiving profile. It landed in the 100th percentile of the selected season.
Analysis workspace
Filter the strongest season sample, inspect game-level shape, and then drop into the full log without losing the story of the year.
Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.
Games
5
Receiving Yards / G
19.8
Efficiency
46.3
Usage
9
Consistency
33.5
Best Game by takeover score
Northwestern
Active game
Hover over a point
Hover or select a game to keep its context visible here without the page shifting around.
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. Maryland: 8. Iowa: 11. Penn State: 1. Minnesota: 25. Northwestern: 54
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. Maryland: 1 by 53.3. Iowa: 2 by 36.7. Penn State: 1 by 6.7. Minnesota: 2 by 83.3. Northwestern: 7 by 51.4
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
5 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
Northwestern
Best efficiency game
83.3 vs Minnesota
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
Purdue
2015-2017
Opening stop
Season Progression
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 Regular Season | Purdue | 93 | 66.8 | 11.3 | — |
| 2016 Regular Season | Purdue | 99 | 46.3 | 9 | 6 |
| 2017 Postseason | Purdue | 678 | 83.6 | 14.7 | 579 |
| 2017 Regular Season | Purdue | 678 | 83.6 | 14.7 | 0 |
#1 Featured game
Iowa
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
135
Primary metric
135 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#2
Marshall
59
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
59 receiving yards with a 98.3 efficiency score.
#3
Arizona
118
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
118 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#4
Indiana
88
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
88 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#5
Northwestern
54
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
54 receiving yards with a 51.4 efficiency score.
#1 Season by value score
2017 Postseason · Purdue
678 primary output · 83.6 efficiency · 14.7 usage
62.6
#2
2017 Regular Season · Purdue
62.6
678 primary · 83.6 efficiency · 14.7 usage
#3
2015 Regular Season · Purdue
39.2
93 primary · 66.8 efficiency · 11.3 usage
2
100+ receiving yards
0
8+ catch outings
2
2+ TD games
Career Facts
1
Career teams
4
Seasons tracked
870
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 4 tracked seasons, 20 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.
Anthony Mahoungou quick answers