Usage Score
27
Player Dossier
2020-2025Arizona
WR • 5'11" • 174 lbs • Compton, CA, USA
Kris Hutson reads as a alpha target based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Usage Score
27
Efficiency
79.9
Consistency
60.8
Season Value
66.9
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2025 Postseason · Arizona
Snapshot
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.
Kris Hutson, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2025 Postseason · Arizona. Kris Hutson reads as a alpha target based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Kris Hutson played WR for Oregon, Washington State, and Arizona. Across 6 tracked seasons, Kris Hutson recorded 33 rushing yards, 2,392 receiving yards, and 2 tackles. His top tracked season came in 2025 with Arizona.
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2025 Postseason
Arizona paired 764 primary output with 79.9 efficiency.
Supporting note
2025 Postseason role shape
target-driven usage with 79.9 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2025 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Multi-stop career journey
Production spans 3 team stops, with role shifts visible across Oregon, Washington State, Arizona.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Baylor
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 then drop into the full log without losing the story of the year.
Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.
Games
11
Receiving Yards / G
69.5
Efficiency
79.9
Usage
27
Consistency
60.8
Best Game by takeover score
SMU
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. SMU: 24. Unknown: 51. Iowa State: 67. Oklahoma State: 38. BYU: 106. Houston: 56. Colorado: 37. Kansas: 34. Cincinnati: 123. Baylor: 133. Arizona State: 95
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. SMU: 3 by 53.3. Unknown: 2 by 100. Iowa State: 6 by 74.4. Oklahoma State: 3 by 84.4. BYU: 9 by 78.5. Houston: 4 by 93.3. Colorado: 5 by 49.3. Kansas: 4 by 56.7. Cincinnati: 8 by 100. Baylor: 9 by 98.5. Arizona State: 7 by 90.5
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
11 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
Baylor
Best efficiency game
100 vs Cincinnati
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 1/3 | @ SMU | L 19-24 | — | 3 | 24 | 8 | 8 | 0 | 12 |
| Sat 11/29 | @ Arizona State | W 23-7 | — | 7 | 95 | 13.6 | 13.60 | 0 | 24 |
| Sat 11/22 | vs Baylor100 receiving yards · High volume | W 41-17 | — | 9 | 133 | 14.8 | 14.80 | 1 | 36 |
| Sat 11/15 | @ Cincinnati100 receiving yards · High volume | W 30-24 | — | 8 | 123 | 15.4 | 15.40 | 0 | 29 |
| Sat 11/8 | vs Kansas | W 24-20 | — | 4 | 34 | 8.5 | 8.50 | 0 | 13 |
| Sat 11/1 | @ Colorado | W 52-17 | — | 5 | 37 | 7.4 | 7.40 | 1 | 12 |
| Sat 10/18 | @ Houston | L 28-31 | — | 4 | 56 | 14 | 14 | 0 | 18 |
| Sun 10/12 | vs BYU100 receiving yards · High volume | L 27-33 | — | 9 | 106 | 11.8 | 11.80 | 1 | 19 |
| Sat 10/4 | vs Oklahoma State | W 41-13 | — | 3 | 38 | 13.3 | 12.70 | 0 | 25 |
| Sat 9/27 | @ Iowa State | L 14-39 | — | 6 | 67 | 9.4 | 11.20 | 1 | 31 |
| Sun 9/7 | vs Unknown | — | — | 2 | 51 | 25.5 | 25.50 | 0 | 40 |
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
Oregon
2020-2023
Opening stop
Washington State
2024
Peak year stop
Arizona
2025
Final stop
Season Progression
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 Postseason | Oregon | 37 | 62.2 | 6.7 | — |
| 2020 Regular Season | Oregon | 37 | 62.2 | 6.7 | 0 |
| 2021 Postseason | Oregon | 419 | 73.5 | 12 | 382 |
| 2021 Regular Season | Oregon | 419 | 73.5 | 12 | 0 |
| 2022 Postseason | Oregon | 473 | 64.6 | 15.7 | 54 |
| 2022 Regular Season | Oregon | 473 | 64.6 | 15.7 | 0 |
| 2023 Regular Season | Oregon | 8 | 53.3 | 3.6 | -465 |
| 2024 Regular Season | Washington State | 691 | 75.1 | 24.3 | 683 |
| 2025 Postseason | Arizona | 764 | 79.9 | 27 | 73 |
| 2025 Regular Season | Arizona | 764 | 79.9 | 27 | 0 |
#1 Featured game
Baylor
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
133
Primary metric
133 receiving yards with a 98.5 efficiency score.
#2
Boise State
126
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
126 receiving yards with a 93.3 efficiency score.
#3
Cincinnati
123
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
123 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#4
Utah
96
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
96 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#5
Colorado
80
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
80 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#1 Season by value score
2025 Postseason · Arizona
764 primary output · 79.9 efficiency · 27 usage
66.9
#2
2025 Regular Season · Arizona
66.9
764 primary · 79.9 efficiency · 27 usage
#3
2024 Regular Season · Washington State
63.9
691 primary · 75.1 efficiency · 24.3 usage
5
100+ receiving yards
5
8+ catch outings
0
2+ TD games
Recruit Profile
Class 2020 · Rating 0.9199
St. John Bosco · Bellflower, CA
Career Facts
3
Career teams
10
Seasons tracked
2,392
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 10 tracked seasons, 53 games, and SP opponent-strength context when available. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.