Usage Score
28.4
Player Dossier
2020-2024Arizona State
Elijhah Badger
WR • 6'1" • 192 lbs • Sacramento, CA, USA
Vertical playmakerExplosive finisher
Elijhah Badger reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
76.7
Consistency
69.9
Season Value
67.9
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2020 Regular Season · Arizona State
20212122232424
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 2
- Seasons Tracked
- 7
- Program Path
- Arizona State • Florida
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Kentucky
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.
Elijhah Badger, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2020 Regular Season · Arizona State. Elijhah Badger reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2020 Regular Season
Arizona State paired 0 primary output with — efficiency.
Supporting note
2022 Regular Season role shape
target-driven usage with 76.7 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2024 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 Arizona State, Florida.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Stanford
Loss with an explosive receiving profile. It landed in the 91.7th 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 · Arizona State
Games
12
Receiving Yards / G
72.2
Efficiency
76.7
Usage
28.4
Consistency
69.9
Best Game by takeover score
Arizona
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. Unknown: 38. Oklahoma State: 91. Eastern Michigan: 88. Utah: 76. USC: 26. Washington: 53. Stanford: 118. Colorado: 137. UCLA: 83. Washington State: 48. Oregon State: 16. Arizona: 92
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. Unknown: 4 by 63.3. Oklahoma State: 6 by 100. Eastern Michigan: 7 by 83.8. Utah: 5 by 100. USC: 2 by 86.7. Washington: 7 by 50.5. Stanford: 6 by 100. Colorado: 8 by 100. UCLA: 8 by 69.2. Washington State: 5 by 64. Oregon State: 4 by 26.7. Arizona: 8 by 76.7
Split Comparison
Wins95 · n=2 · +24.1 vs Losses
Losses70.9 · n=9 · -24.1 vs Wins
First Half62 · n=6 · -20.3 vs Second Half
Second Half82.3 · n=6 · +20.3 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
12 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
Stanford
Best efficiency game
100 vs Colorado
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fri 11/25 | @ ArizonaHigh volume | L 35-38 | — | 8 | 92 | 10.6 | 11.50 | 1 | 34 |
| Sat 11/19 | vs Oregon State | L 7-31 | — | 4 | 16 | 4.4 | 4 | 0 | 9 |
| Sat 11/12 | @ Washington State | L 18-28 | — | 5 | 48 | 8.8 | 9.60 | 1 | 16 |
| Sun 11/6 | vs UCLAHigh volume | L 36-50 | — | 8 | 83 | 10.4 | 10.40 | 1 | 16 |
| Sat 10/29 | @ Colorado100 receiving yards · High volume | W 42-34 | — | 8 | 137 | 16.2 | 17.10 | 0 | 37 |
| Sat 10/22 | @ Stanford100 receiving yards | L 14-15 | — | 6 | 118 | 19.7 | 19.70 | 1 | 39 |
| Sat 10/8 | vs Washington2+ TD | W 45-38 | — | 7 | 53 | 7.6 | 7.60 | 2 | 20 |
| Sun 10/2 | @ USC | L 25-42 | — | 2 | 26 | 13 | 13 | 0 | 19 |
| Sun 9/25 | vs Utah | L 13-34 | — | 5 | 76 | 15.2 | 15.20 | 0 | 21 |
| Sun 9/18 | vs Eastern Michigan | L 21-30 | — | 7 | 88 | 12.6 | 12.60 | 0 | 29 |
| Sat 9/10 | @ Oklahoma State | L 17-34 | — | 6 | 91 | 15.2 | 15.20 | 1 | 28 |
| Fri 9/2 | vs Unknown | — | — | 4 | 38 | 9.5 | 9.50 | 0 | 15 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Arizona State
2020-2023
Opening stop
- 2
Florida
2024
Final stop
Season Progression
2020202120212022202320242024
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 Regular Season | Arizona State | 0 | — | — | — |
| 2021 Postseason | Arizona State | 61 | 51.1 | 8.1 | 61 |
| 2021 Regular Season | Arizona State | 61 | 51.1 | 8.1 | 0 |
| 2022 Regular Season | Arizona State | 866 | 76.7 | 28.4 | 805 |
| 2023 Regular Season | Arizona State | 713 | 64.9 | 26.2 | -153 |
| 2024 Postseason | Florida | 806 | 90 | 23.2 | 93 |
| 2024 Regular Season | Florida | 806 | 90 | 23.2 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Kentucky
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
148
Primary metric
148 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#2
LSU
131
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
131 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#3
Stanford
118
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
118 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#4
Colorado
137
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
137 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#5
Oklahoma State
91
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
91 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2020 Regular Season · Arizona State
0 primary output · — efficiency · — usage
100
#2
2022 Regular Season · Arizona State
67.9
866 primary · 76.7 efficiency · 28.4 usage
#3
2024 Postseason · Florida
62.4
806 primary · 90 efficiency · 23.2 usage
Milestones
7
100+ receiving yards
7
8+ catch outings
1
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
4★
Class 2020 · Rating 0.9364
Folsom · Sacramento, CA
- Committed To
- Arizona State
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2020
Career Facts
2
Career teams
7
Seasons tracked
2,446
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 7 tracked seasons, 43 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.