Player Stats

Alex Highsmith 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
167
TFL
41
Sacks
16.5
QB hurries
19
Passes defended
4

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesTacklesTFLSacksQB HurPDTDOverall
2016 Regular SeasonCharlotte11172111018.2
2017 Regular SeasonCharlotte933527-036.7
2018 Regular SeasonCharlotte115417.5341066.7
2019 PostseasonCharlotte127-0--078
2019 Regular SeasonCharlotte125616.510.572078

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2019 Postseason

Charlotte paired 36 primary output with 50.2 efficiency.

Supporting note

2019 Postseason role shape

impact-led usage with 50.2 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: Gardner-Webb

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 · Charlotte

Games

12

Havoc Plays / G

3

Efficiency

50.2

Usage

17.4

Consistency

61.9

Best Game by takeover score

Gardner-Webb

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. Buffalo: 0. Gardner-Webb: 6. App State: 6. Massachusetts: 2.5. Clemson: 2. Florida Atlantic: 2. Florida International: 0. Western Kentucky: 4. North Texas: 3.5. Middle Tennessee: 3. UTEP: 2. Marshall: 5

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. Buffalo: 7 by 29.2. Gardner-Webb: 7 by 79.2. App State: 4 by 66.7. Massachusetts: 5 by 45.8. Clemson: 3 by 32.5. Florida Atlantic: 3 by 32.5. Florida International: 5 by 20.8. Western Kentucky: 6 by 65. North Texas: 9 by 72.5. Middle Tennessee: 5 by 50.8. UTEP: 4 by 36.7. Marshall: 5 by 70.8

Split Comparison

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

Wins3.7 · Games = 6 · +1.3 vs Losses
Losses2.3 · Games = 6 · -1.3 vs Wins