Player Stats

Sean Savoy 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

Receiving yards
698
Receptions
63
Touchdowns
8

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesRecRec YdsTDOverall
2016 Regular SeasonVirginia Tech0-00-
2017 PostseasonVirginia Tech12-0069.4
2017 Regular SeasonVirginia Tech1239454669.4
2018 Regular SeasonVirginia Tech918188244.9
2019 Regular SeasonMaryland5656045.5

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2017 Postseason

Virginia Tech paired 454 primary output with 72.5 efficiency.

Supporting note

2019 Regular Season role shape

target-driven usage with 66.7 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value stayed steady

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

Supporting note

Multi-stop career journey

Production spans 2 team stops, with role shifts visible across Virginia Tech, Maryland.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: Penn State

Loss with an explosive receiving profile. It landed in the 75th 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 Regular Season · Maryland

Games

5

Receiving Yards / G

11.2

Efficiency

66.7

Usage

8.4

Consistency

74.9

Best Game by takeover score

Penn 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.

12345

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Howard: 0. Penn State: 15. Rutgers: 17. Purdue: 15. Indiana: 9

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. Penn State: 1 by 100. Rutgers: 2 by 56.7. Purdue: 2 by 50. Indiana: 1 by 60

Split Comparison

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

Wins8.5 · Games = 2 · -4.5 vs Losses
Losses13 · Games = 3 · +4.5 vs Wins