Usage Score
8.6
Player Dossier
2015-2018Texas A&M
DB • 6'0" • 200 lbs • New Orleans, LA, USA
Deshawn Capers-Smith shows a ball-hunting defender profile with 33.7 disruption score.
Usage Score
8.6
Efficiency
33.7
Consistency
55.2
Season Value
31.2
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2018 Postseason · Texas A&M
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.
Deshawn Capers-Smith, DB. Best season Best season by value score: 2018 Postseason · Texas A&M. Deshawn Capers-Smith shows a ball-hunting defender profile with 33.7 disruption score.
Deshawn Capers-Smith played DB for Texas A&M. Across 4 tracked seasons, Deshawn Capers-Smith recorded 108 tackles. His top tracked season came in 2018 with Texas A&M.
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2018 Postseason
Texas A&M paired 12 primary output with 33.7 efficiency.
Supporting note
2018 Postseason role shape
impact-led usage with 33.7 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: NC State
Win with 3 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet. 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
10
Havoc Plays / G
1.2
Efficiency
33.7
Usage
8.6
Consistency
55.2
Best Game by takeover score
NC State
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. NC State: 3. Clemson: 1. UL Monroe: 0. Alabama: 1. Arkansas: 2.5. Kentucky: 0. South Carolina: 1. Mississippi State: 0. UAB: 1. LSU: 2.5
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. NC State: 9 by 67.5. Clemson: 4 by 26.7. UL Monroe: 3 by 12.5. Alabama: 8 by 43.3. Arkansas: 7 by 54.2. Kentucky: 2 by 8.3. South Carolina: 5 by 30.8. Mississippi State: 4 by 16.7. UAB: 2 by 18.3. LSU: 8 by 58.3
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.
10 games
Featured metric
Havoc Plays
Top game by takeover score
NC State
Best efficiency game
67.5 vs NC State
| Result | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tue 1/1 | vs NC StateSplash game | W 52-13 | 9 | 7 | — | 3 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sun 11/25 | vs LSU | W 74-72 | 8 | 4 | — | 1.50 | 0 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Sun 11/18 | vs UAB | W 41-20 | 2 | 1 | — | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 10/27 | @ Mississippi State | L 13-28 | 4 | 3 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 10/13 | @ South Carolina | W 26-23 | 5 | 3 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Sat 10/6 | vs Kentucky | W 20-14 | 2 | 0 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 9/29 | vs Arkansas | W 24-17 | 7 | 5 | — | 1.50 | 0 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Sat 9/22 | @ Alabama | L 23-45 | 8 | 4 | — | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 9/15 | vs UL Monroe | W 48-10 | 3 | 1 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 9/8 | vs Clemson | L 26-28 | 4 | 3 | — | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
Texas A&M
2015-2018
Opening stop
Season Progression
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 Regular Season | Texas A&M | 0 | — | — | — |
| 2016 Postseason | Texas A&M | 3 | 15.8 | 1.9 | 3 |
| 2016 Regular Season | Texas A&M | 3 | 15.8 | 1.9 | 0 |
| 2017 Postseason | Texas A&M | 5 | 14.2 | 3.6 | 2 |
| 2017 Regular Season | Texas A&M | 5 | 14.2 | 3.6 | 0 |
| 2018 Postseason | Texas A&M | 12 | 33.7 | 8.6 | 7 |
| 2018 Regular Season | Texas A&M | 12 | 33.7 | 8.6 | 0 |
#1 Featured game
NC State
Win with 3 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
3
Primary metric
3 disruption/tackle impact with 62.8 takeover score.
#2
Mississippi State
1
Primary metric
Loss with 1 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
1 disruption/tackle impact with 50.6 takeover score.
#3
LSU
2.5
Primary metric
Win with 2.5 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
2.5 disruption/tackle impact with 50.1 takeover score.
#4
Arkansas
2.5
Primary metric
Win with 2.5 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
2.5 disruption/tackle impact with 50 takeover score.
#5
Wake Forest
2
Primary metric
Loss with 2 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
2 disruption/tackle impact with 48.6 takeover score.
#1 Season by value score
2018 Postseason · Texas A&M
12 primary output · 33.7 efficiency · 8.6 usage
31.2
#2
2018 Regular Season · Texas A&M
31.2
12 primary · 33.7 efficiency · 8.6 usage
#3
2017 Postseason · Texas A&M
10.1
5 primary · 14.2 efficiency · 3.6 usage
1
Impact games
1
Splash games
0
10+ tackle games
Recruit Profile
Class 2015 · Rating 0.8753
Warren Easton · New Orleans, LA
Career Facts
1
Career teams
7
Seasons tracked
108
Career Tackles
Data Context
Coverage spans 7 tracked seasons, 31 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.