Usage Score
24.5
Player Dossier
2018-2022Auburn
Shaun Shivers
RB • 5'7" • 186 lbs • Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA
Balanced backfield optionSteady chain mover
Shaun Shivers leans balanced backfield option traits and 38.2 efficiency.
Efficiency
38.2
Consistency
45.8
Season Value
51.8
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2022 Regular Season · Indiana
1818191920202122
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 2
- Seasons Tracked
- 8
- Program Path
- Auburn • Indiana
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Unknown
Scouting Read
Best season and peak-game context are pinned here so the rest of the page can stay analytical without losing the headline story.
Shaun Shivers, RB. Best season Best season by value score: 2022 Regular Season · Indiana. Shaun Shivers leans balanced backfield option traits and 38.2 efficiency.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2022 Regular Season
Indiana paired 720 primary output with 38.2 efficiency.
Supporting note
2022 Regular Season role shape
backfield-heavy usage with 38.2 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2022 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 Auburn, Indiana.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Unknown
Game driven by a workhorse rushing load. It landed in the 100th percentile of the selected season.
Analysis workspace
Season Workbench
Filter the strongest season sample, inspect game-level shape, and then drop into the full log without losing the story of the year.
Season Explorer
Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.
2022 Regular Season · Indiana
Games
12
Scrimmage Yards / G
60
Efficiency
38.2
Usage
24.5
Consistency
45.8
Best Game by takeover score
Purdue
Hover a point or expand a game row to keep the active game context visible here.
Game-by-Game Trend
123456789101112
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Illinois: 37. Unknown: 158. Western Kentucky: 89. Cincinnati: 101. Nebraska: 30. Michigan: 42. Maryland: 42. Rutgers: 27. Penn State: -2. Ohio State: 20. Michigan State: 115. Purdue: 61
Volume vs Efficiency
Low volume / high quality
High volume / high quality
Low volume / lower quality
High volume / lower quality
Volume on the x-axis, quality on the y-axis.
Volume versus efficiency scatter chart. Illinois: 16 by 21.3. Unknown: 21 by 79.8. Western Kentucky: 19 by 43.7. Cincinnati: 24 by 43.5. Nebraska: 11 by 28.7. Michigan: 11 by 38.2. Maryland: 16 by 25.2. Rutgers: 5 by 27.2. Penn State: 4 by 0. Ohio State: 8 by 26. Michigan State: 13 by 86.9. Purdue: 17 by 37.6
Split Comparison
Wins80.3 · n=3 · +40.2 vs Losses
Losses40.1 · n=8 · -40.2 vs Wins
First Half76.2 · n=6 · +32.3 vs Second Half
Second Half43.8 · n=6 · -32.3 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
12 games
Featured metric
Scrimmage Yards
Top game by takeover score
Unknown
Best efficiency game
86.9 vs Michigan State
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 11/26 | vs Purdue | L 16-30 | 16 | 58 | 3.60 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 3.6 |
| Sat 11/19 | @ Michigan State100 rush yards · 2+ TD | W 39-31 | 13 | 115 | 8.80 | 2 | — | — | 8.8 |
| Sat 11/12 | @ Ohio State | L 14-56 | 8 | 20 | 2.50 | 0 | — | — | 2.5 |
| Sat 11/5 | vs Penn State | L 14-45 | 3 | -6 | -2 | 0 | 1 | 4 | -0.5 |
| Sat 10/22 | @ Rutgers | L 17-24 | 4 | 3 | 0.80 | 0 | 1 | 24 | 5.4 |
| Sat 10/15 | vs Maryland | L 33-38 | 14 | 32 | 2.30 | 0 | 2 | 10 | 2.6 |
| Sat 10/8 | vs Michigan | L 10-31 | 7 | 25 | 3.60 | 0 | 4 | 17 | 3.8 |
| Sat 10/1 | @ Nebraska | L 21-35 | 9 | 25 | 2.80 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 2.7 |
| Sat 9/24 | @ Cincinnati2+ TD | L 24-45 | 19 | 79 | 4.20 | 1 | 5 | 22 | 4.2 |
| Sat 9/17 | vs Western Kentucky | W 33-30 | 15 | 58 | 3.90 | 0 | 4 | 31 | 4.7 |
| Sun 9/11 | vs Unknown100 rush yards · 150 scrimmage yards | — | 20 | 155 | 7.80 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 7.5 |
| Sat 9/3 | vs Illinois | W 23-20 | 15 | 28 | 1.90 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 2.3 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Auburn
2018-2021
Opening stop
- 2
Indiana
2022
Final stop
Season Progression
20182018201920192020202020212022
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 Postseason | Auburn | 361 | 53 | 9.2 | — |
| 2018 Regular Season | Auburn | 361 | 53 | 9.2 | 0 |
| 2019 Postseason | Auburn | 287 | 46.1 | 7.9 | -74 |
| 2019 Regular Season | Auburn | 287 | 46.1 | 7.9 | 0 |
| 2020 Postseason | Auburn | 331 | 42.9 | 16.5 | 44 |
| 2020 Regular Season | Auburn | 331 | 42.9 | 16.5 | 0 |
| 2021 Regular Season | Auburn | 250 | 64.9 | 8.5 | -81 |
| 2022 Regular Season | Indiana | 720 | 38.2 | 24.5 | 470 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Unknown
Game driven by a workhorse rushing load.
158
Primary metric
158 scrimmage yards and 40.4 usage.
#2
Unknown
117
Primary metric
Game with 117 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value.
117 scrimmage yards and 19.4 usage.
#3
Texas A&M
92
Primary metric
Loss with 92 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value.
92 scrimmage yards and 28.9 usage.
#4
Kent State
102
Primary metric
Win with 102 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value.
102 scrimmage yards and 16 usage.
#5
Akron
43
Primary metric
Win with 43 yards from scrimmage and efficient touch value.
43 scrimmage yards and 5.6 usage.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2022 Regular Season · Indiana
720 primary output · 38.2 efficiency · 24.5 usage
51.8
#2
2021 Regular Season · Auburn
47.5
250 primary · 64.9 efficiency · 8.5 usage
#3
2018 Postseason · Auburn
40
361 primary · 53 efficiency · 9.2 usage
Milestones
5
100+ rush yards
1
150+ scrimmage yards
3
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
4★
Class 2018 · Rating 0.8939
Chaminade-Madonna · Hollywood, FL
- Committed To
- Auburn
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2018
Career Facts
2
Career teams
8
Seasons tracked
1,949
Career Scrimmage Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 8 tracked seasons, 53 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.