Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2021 Postseason
Eastern Michigan paired 1,015 primary output with 64.5 efficiency.
Player Stats
Career production, season-by-season totals, and the selected-season workbench are grouped here for stat-first searches.
Stat Footprint
Season Ledger
| Season | Team | Games | Rec | Rec Yds | TD | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 Regular Season | Eastern Michigan | 0 | - | 0 | 0 | - |
| 2019 Postseason | Eastern Michigan | 11 | 9 | 113 | 0 | 46.6 |
| 2019 Regular Season | Eastern Michigan | 11 | 20 | 232 | 1 | 46.6 |
| 2020 Regular Season | Eastern Michigan | 5 | 40 | 508 | 0 | 79.3 |
| 2021 Postseason | Eastern Michigan | 13 | 11 | 83 | 0 | 80.9 |
| 2021 Regular Season | Eastern Michigan | 13 | 86 | 932 | 4 | 80.9 |
| 2022 Postseason | Eastern Michigan | 13 | 2 | 22 | 0 | 60.2 |
| 2022 Regular Season | Eastern Michigan | 13 | 48 | 453 | 4 | 60.2 |
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2021 Postseason
Eastern Michigan paired 1,015 primary output with 64.5 efficiency.
Supporting note
2022 Postseason role shape
target-driven usage with 60.4 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2022 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Ball State
Win with an explosive receiving profile. It landed in the 100th percentile of the selected season.
Analysis workspace
Filter the strongest season sample, inspect game-level shape, and compare the statistical profile without scrolling through the full player page.
Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.
Games
13
Receiving Yards / G
36.5
Efficiency
60.4
Usage
21.1
Consistency
63.4
Best Game by takeover score
Ball State
Active game
Hover over a point
Hover or select a game to keep its context visible here without the page shifting around.
Follow how the selected stat changes from one game to the next. Spikes mark standout outings, while dips show quieter weeks.
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. San José State: 22. Eastern Kentucky: 48. Louisiana: 44. Arizona State: 6. Buffalo: 50. Massachusetts: 7. Western Michigan: 57. Northern Illinois: 2. Ball State: 85. Toledo: 35. Akron: 19. Kent State: 70. Central Michigan: 30
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. San José State: 2 by 73.3. Eastern Kentucky: 3 by 100. Louisiana: 5 by 58.7. Arizona State: 1 by 40. Buffalo: 4 by 83.3. Massachusetts: 1 by 46.7. Western Michigan: 3 by 100. Northern Illinois: 3 by 4.4. Ball State: 10 by 56.7. Toledo: 5 by 46.7. Akron: 3 by 42.2. Kent State: 7 by 66.7. Central Michigan: 3 by 66.7
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Next best actions
Move from the player story into the game log, career arc, team context, and video shelf.