Usage Score
8.7
Player Dossier
2019-2023Iowa State
Easton Dean
TE • 6'6" • 265 lbs • Oswego, KS, USA
Reliable chain-moverPossession profile
Easton Dean reads as a reliable chain-mover based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
53.8
Consistency
35.8
Season Value
49.6
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2022 Regular Season · Iowa State
192021222323
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 6
- Program Path
- Iowa State
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Oklahoma State
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.
Easton Dean, TE. Best season Best season by value score: 2022 Regular Season · Iowa State. Easton Dean reads as a reliable chain-mover based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Easton Dean played TE for Iowa State. Across 5 tracked seasons, Easton Dean recorded 343 receiving yards and 5 touchdowns. His top tracked season came in 2023 with Iowa State.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2022 Regular Season
Iowa State paired 129 primary output with 76.7 efficiency.
Supporting note
2023 Postseason role shape
target-driven usage with 53.8 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2023 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Texas
Loss with an explosive receiving profile. 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.
2023 Postseason · Iowa State
Games
10
Receiving Yards / G
17.1
Efficiency
53.8
Usage
8.7
Consistency
35.8
Best Game by takeover score
Memphis
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.
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Memphis: 15. Unknown: 21. Iowa: 4. Oklahoma State: 27. Oklahoma: 5. TCU: 11. Baylor: 1. Kansas: 9. BYU: 12. Texas: 66
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 100. Unknown: 3 by 46.7. Iowa: 1 by 26.7. Oklahoma State: 2 by 90. Oklahoma: 1 by 33.3. TCU: 3 by 24.4. Baylor: 1 by 6.7. Kansas: 2 by 30. BYU: 1 by 80. Texas: 1 by 100
Split Comparison
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Wins12.8 · Games = 4 · -7.1 vs Losses
Losses19.8 · Games = 5 · +7.1 vs Wins
First Half14.4 · Games = 5 · -5.4 vs Second Half
Second Half19.8 · Games = 5 · +5.4 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
10 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
Texas
Best efficiency game
100 vs Memphis
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fri 12/29 | vs Memphis | L 26-36 | — | 1 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 1 | 15 |
| Sun 11/19 | vs Texas | L 16-26 | — | 1 | 66 | 66 | 66 | 1 | 66 |
| Sun 11/12 | @ BYU | W 45-13 | — | 1 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 0 | 12 |
| Sat 11/4 | vs Kansas | L 21-28 | — | 2 | 9 | 4.5 | 4.50 | 0 | 7 |
| Sat 10/28 | @ Baylor | W 30-18 | — | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Sun 10/8 | vs TCU | W 27-14 | — | 3 | 11 | 3.7 | 3.70 | 1 | 5 |
| Sat 9/30 | @ Oklahoma | L 20-50 | — | 1 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
| Sat 9/23 | vs Oklahoma State | W 34-27 | — | 2 | 27 | 13.5 | 13.50 | 0 | 15 |
| Sat 9/9 | vs Iowa | L 13-20 | — | 1 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 4 |
| Sat 9/2 | vs Unknown | — | — | 3 | 21 | 7 | 7 | 0 | 9 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Iowa State
2019-2023
Opening stop
Season Progression
201920202021202220232023
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 Regular Season | Iowa State | 0 | — | — | — |
| 2020 Regular Season | Iowa State | 25 | 100 | 4 | 25 |
| 2021 Regular Season | Iowa State | 18 | 100 | 5.3 | -7 |
| 2022 Regular Season | Iowa State | 129 | 76.7 | 4.8 | 111 |
| 2023 Postseason | Iowa State | 171 | 53.8 | 8.7 | 42 |
| 2023 Regular Season | Iowa State | 171 | 53.8 | 8.7 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Oklahoma State
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
31
Primary metric
31 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#2
Kansas
18
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
18 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#3
Texas
66
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
66 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#4
Kansas
25
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
25 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#5
Texas Tech
24
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
24 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2022 Regular Season · Iowa State
129 primary output · 76.7 efficiency · 4.8 usage
57.1
#2
2020 Regular Season · Iowa State
54.9
25 primary · 100 efficiency · 4 usage
#3
2023 Postseason · Iowa State
49.6
171 primary · 53.8 efficiency · 8.7 usage
Milestones
0
100+ receiving yards
0
8+ catch outings
0
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
3★
Class 2019 · Rating 0.8633
Labette County · Altamont, KS
- Committed To
- Iowa State
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2019
Career Facts
1
Career teams
6
Seasons tracked
343
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 6 tracked seasons, 21 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.