Player Stats

Bradlee Anae 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
132
TFL
40.5
Sacks
29
QB hurries
3
Passes defended
4

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesTacklesTFLSacksQB HurPDTDOverall
2016 PostseasonUtah31-0--034.1
2016 Regular SeasonUtah3322--034.1
2017 PostseasonUtah112-02-061.1
2017 Regular SeasonUtah1134961-061.1
2018 PostseasonUtah13310--071.8
2018 Regular SeasonUtah134814.58-3071.8
2019 PostseasonUtah1260.50.5--070.9
2019 Regular SeasonUtah123513.512.5-1070.9

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2018 Postseason

Utah paired 26.5 primary output with 36 efficiency.

Supporting note

2019 Postseason role shape

impact-led usage with 35.1 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value stayed steady

2019 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: Arizona State

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.

2019 Postseason · Utah

Games

12

Havoc Plays / G

2.3

Efficiency

35.1

Usage

16.5

Consistency

48.7

Best Game by takeover score

Arizona State

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.

123456789101112

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Texas: 1. Northern Illinois: 6. Idaho State: 0. USC: 3. Washington State: 0. Oregon State: 0. Arizona State: 7. Washington: 2. UCLA: 4. Arizona: 2. Colorado: 3. Oregon: 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. Texas: 6 by 35. Northern Illinois: 4 by 66.7. Idaho State: 1 by 4.2. USC: 5 by 50.8. Washington State: 1 by 4.2. Oregon State: 3 by 12.5. Arizona State: 3 by 62.5. Washington: 2 by 28.3. UCLA: 2 by 48.3. Arizona: 7 by 49.2. Colorado: 5 by 50.8. Oregon: 2 by 8.3

Split Comparison

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

Wins2.7 · Games = 9 · +1.3 vs Losses
Losses1.3 · Games = 3 · -1.3 vs Wins