Player Stats

Evan Fields 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
202
TFL
8.5
Passes defended
2

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesTacklesTFLSacksQB HurPDTDOverall
2017 Regular SeasonArizona State4160.50--016.3
2018 PostseasonArizona State7810--050.4
2018 Regular SeasonArizona State72620-1050.4
2019 PostseasonArizona State13710--052.4
2019 Regular SeasonArizona State13773.50--052.4
2020 Regular SeasonArizona State438-0-1027.1
2021 PostseasonArizona State74-0--016
2021 Regular SeasonArizona State7260.50--016

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2019 Postseason

Arizona State paired 6.5 primary output with 31.6 efficiency.

Supporting note

2021 Postseason role shape

impact-led usage with 18.6 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value stayed steady

2021 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: BYU

Loss with 0.5 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet. 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.

2021 Postseason · Arizona State

Games

7

Havoc Plays / G

0.1

Efficiency

18.6

Usage

4

Consistency

4.8

Best Game by takeover score

BYU

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.

1234567

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Wisconsin: 0. Southern Utah: 0. UNLV: 0. BYU: 0.5. Colorado: 0. Stanford: 0. USC: 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. Wisconsin: 4 by 16.7. Southern Utah: 4 by 16.7. UNLV: 2 by 8.3. BYU: 5 by 25.8. Colorado: 5 by 20.8. Stanford: 7 by 29.2. USC: 3 by 12.5

Split Comparison

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

Wins0 · Games = 5 · -0.3 vs Losses
Losses0.3 · Games = 2 · +0.3 vs Wins