Usage Score
30.3
Player Dossier
2015-2017Texas A&M
Christian Kirk
WR • 5'11" • 200 lbs • Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Alpha targetExplosive finisher
Christian Kirk reads as a alpha target based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
75.6
Consistency
58.5
Season Value
64.6
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2016 Postseason · Texas A&M
151516161717
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 6
- Program Path
- Texas A&M
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Mississippi State
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.
Christian Kirk, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2016 Postseason · Texas A&M. Christian Kirk reads as a alpha target based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2016 Postseason
Texas A&M paired 928 primary output with 70.7 efficiency.
Supporting note
2017 Postseason role shape
target-driven usage with 75.6 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: Wake Forest
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.
2017 Postseason · Texas A&M
Games
13
Receiving Yards / G
70.7
Efficiency
75.6
Usage
30.3
Consistency
58.5
Best Game by takeover score
Wake Forest
Hover a point or expand a game row to keep the active game context visible here.
Game-by-Game Trend
12345678910111213
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Wake Forest: 189. UCLA: 60. Unknown: 47. Louisiana: 34. Arkansas: 110. South Carolina: 13. Alabama: 52. Florida: 44. Mississippi State: 33. Auburn: 62. New Mexico: 120. Ole Miss: 77. LSU: 78
Volume vs Efficiency
Low volume / high quality
High volume / high quality
Low volume / lower quality
High volume / lower quality
Volume on the x-axis, quality on the y-axis.
Volume versus efficiency scatter chart. Wake Forest: 13 by 96.9. UCLA: 5 by 80. Unknown: 6 by 52.2. Louisiana: 3 by 75.6. Arkansas: 5 by 100. South Carolina: 4 by 21.7. Alabama: 4 by 86.7. Florida: 2 by 100. Mississippi State: 5 by 44. Auburn: 8 by 51.7. New Mexico: 4 by 100. Ole Miss: 5 by 100. LSU: 7 by 74.3
Split Comparison
Wins66.3 · n=6 · -12.7 vs Losses
Losses79 · n=6 · +12.7 vs Wins
First Half72.1 · n=7 · +3.1 vs Second Half
Second Half69 · n=6 · -3.1 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
13 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
Wake Forest
Best efficiency game
100 vs Ole Miss
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fri 12/29 | vs Wake Forest100 receiving yards · High volume | L 52-55 | — | 13 | 189 | 13.8 | 14.50 | 3 | 52 |
| Sun 11/26 | @ LSU | L 21-45 | — | 7 | 78 | 11.1 | 11.10 | 1 | 31 |
| Sun 11/19 | @ Ole Miss | W 31-24 | — | 5 | 77 | 15.4 | 15.40 | 0 | 25 |
| Sun 11/12 | vs New Mexico100 receiving yards | W 55-14 | — | 4 | 120 | 30 | 30 | 1 | 60 |
| Sat 11/4 | vs AuburnHigh volume | L 27-42 | — | 8 | 62 | 7.8 | 7.80 | 0 | 29 |
| Sat 10/28 | vs Mississippi State | L 14-35 | — | 5 | 33 | 6.6 | 6.60 | 0 | 11 |
| Sat 10/14 | @ Florida | W 19-17 | — | 2 | 44 | 22 | 22 | 0 | 40 |
| Sat 10/7 | vs Alabama | L 19-27 | — | 4 | 52 | 13 | 13 | 1 | 25 |
| Sat 9/30 | vs South Carolina | W 24-17 | — | 4 | 13 | 3.3 | 3.30 | 0 | 6 |
| Sat 9/23 | @ Arkansas100 receiving yards · 2+ TD | W 50-43 | — | 5 | 110 | 22 | 22 | 2 | 81 |
| Sat 9/16 | vs Louisiana | W 45-21 | — | 3 | 34 | 11.3 | 11.30 | 1 | 18 |
| Sat 9/9 | vs Unknown | — | — | 6 | 47 | 10.7 | 7.80 | 1 | 27 |
| Sun 9/3 | @ UCLA | L 44-45 | — | 5 | 60 | 8.4 | 12 | 0 | 15 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Texas A&M
2015-2017
Opening stop
Season Progression
201520152016201620172017
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 Postseason | Texas A&M | 1,009 | 75.1 | 28.7 | — |
| 2015 Regular Season | Texas A&M | 1,009 | 75.1 | 28.7 | 0 |
| 2016 Postseason | Texas A&M | 928 | 70.7 | 33.9 | -81 |
| 2016 Regular Season | Texas A&M | 928 | 70.7 | 33.9 | 0 |
| 2017 Postseason | Texas A&M | 919 | 75.6 | 30.3 | -9 |
| 2017 Regular Season | Texas A&M | 919 | 75.6 | 30.3 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Mississippi State
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
144
Primary metric
144 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#2
Arkansas
173
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
173 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#3
Wake Forest
189
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
189 receiving yards with a 96.9 efficiency score.
#4
LSU
107
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
107 receiving yards with a 89.2 efficiency score.
#5
Nevada
120
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
120 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2016 Postseason · Texas A&M
928 primary output · 70.7 efficiency · 33.9 usage
68.8
#2
2016 Regular Season · Texas A&M
68.8
928 primary · 70.7 efficiency · 33.9 usage
#3
2015 Postseason · Texas A&M
67.5
1,009 primary · 75.1 efficiency · 28.7 usage
Milestones
10
100+ receiving yards
10
8+ catch outings
6
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
5★
Class 2015 · Rating 0.9891
Saguaro · Scottsdale, AZ
- Committed To
- Texas A&M
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2015
Career Facts
1
Career teams
6
Seasons tracked
2,856
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 6 tracked seasons, 39 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.