Player Stats

Yetur Gross-Matos 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
111
TFL
37
Sacks
19
QB hurries
16

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesTacklesTFLSacksQB HurPDTDOverall
2017 PostseasonPenn State10111--021.9
2017 Regular SeasonPenn State101610.53-021.9
2018 PostseasonPenn State130-01-074.2
2018 Regular SeasonPenn State13542085-074.2
2019 PostseasonPenn State11111--075.2
2019 Regular SeasonPenn State1139148.57-075.2

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2019 Postseason

Penn State paired 31.5 primary output with 42.4 efficiency.

Supporting note

2019 Postseason role shape

impact-led usage with 42.4 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: Ohio State

Loss with backfield disruption leading the way. It landed in the 90.9th 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 · Penn State

Games

11

Havoc Plays / G

2.9

Efficiency

42.4

Usage

12.3

Consistency

65.8

Best Game by takeover score

Ohio 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.

1234567891011

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Memphis: 2. Idaho: 5. Buffalo: 3. Maryland: 3. Purdue: 6. Iowa: 1. Michigan: 0.5. Michigan State: 2.5. Minnesota: 0. Indiana: 3. Ohio State: 5.5

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. Memphis: 1 by 24.2. Idaho: 3 by 62.5. Buffalo: 3 by 42.5. Maryland: 5 by 50.8. Purdue: 2 by 58.3. Iowa: 5 by 30.8. Michigan: 5 by 25.8. Michigan State: 3 by 37.5. Minnesota: 2 by 8.3. Indiana: 2 by 38.3. Ohio State: 9 by 87.5

Split Comparison

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

Wins2.9 · Games = 9 · +0.1 vs Losses
Losses2.8 · Games = 2 · -0.1 vs Wins