Usage Score
9.5
Player Dossier
2019-2021Alabama
Christian Harris
LB • 6'2" • 232 lbs • Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Ball-hunting defenderSplash play profile
Christian Harris shows a ball-hunting defender profile with 34.9 disruption score.
Efficiency
34.9
Consistency
29.9
Season Value
26.4
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2020 Postseason · Alabama
191920202121
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 6
- Program Path
- Alabama
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Georgia
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.
Christian Harris, LB. Best season Best season by value score: 2020 Postseason · Alabama. Christian Harris shows a ball-hunting defender profile with 34.9 disruption score.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2020 Postseason
Alabama paired 14.5 primary output with 38.3 efficiency.
Supporting note
2021 Postseason role shape
impact-led usage with 34.9 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2021 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Georgia
Loss with backfield disruption leading the way. 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.
2021 Postseason · Alabama
Games
15
Havoc Plays / G
1.4
Efficiency
34.9
Usage
9.5
Consistency
29.9
Best Game by takeover score
Georgia
Hover a point or expand a game row to keep the active game context visible here.
Game-by-Game Trend
123456789101112131415
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Georgia: 7. Cincinnati: 1. Miami: 3. Unknown: 1. Florida: 1. Southern Miss: 1. Ole Miss: 1. Texas A&M: 0. Mississippi State: 1. Tennessee: 0.5. LSU: 3. New Mexico State: 0. Arkansas: 1. Auburn: 1. Georgia: 0
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. Georgia: 7 by 79.2. Cincinnati: 4 by 26.7. Miami: 5 by 50.8. Unknown: 8 by 43.3. Florida: 6 by 35. Southern Miss: 5 by 30.8. Ole Miss: 3 by 22.5. Texas A&M: 4 by 16.7. Mississippi State: 5 by 30.8. Tennessee: 5 by 25.8. LSU: 6 by 55. New Mexico State: 6 by 25. Arkansas: 5 by 30.8. Auburn: 5 by 30.8. Georgia: 5 by 20.8
Split Comparison
Wins1.1 · n=12 · -2.4 vs Losses
Losses3.5 · n=2 · +2.4 vs Wins
First Half1.9 · n=8 · +0.9 vs Second Half
Second Half0.9 · n=7 · -0.9 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
15 games
Featured metric
Havoc Plays
Top game by takeover score
Georgia
Best efficiency game
79.2 vs Georgia
| Result | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tue 1/11 | vs Georgia2+ sacks · Splash game | L 18-33 | 7 | 5 | — | 4 | 3 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Fri 12/31 | vs Cincinnati | W 27-6 | 4 | 1 | — | 0.50 | 0.50 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 12/4 | vs Georgia | W 41-24 | 5 | 3 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 11/27 | @ Auburn | W 24-22 | 5 | 4 | — | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 11/20 | vs Arkansas | W 42-35 | 5 | 3 | — | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 11/13 | vs New Mexico State | W 59-3 | 6 | 5 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 11/6 | vs LSU | W 20-14 | 6 | 1 | — | 0.50 | 0.50 | — | 2 | — | — |
| Sat 10/23 | vs Tennessee | W 52-24 | 5 | 4 | — | 0.50 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 10/16 | @ Mississippi State | W 49-9 | 5 | 2 | — | 0.50 | 0.50 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sun 10/10 | @ Texas A&M | L 38-41 | 4 | 3 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 10/2 | vs Ole Miss | W 42-21 | 3 | 1 | — | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 9/25 | vs Southern Miss | W 63-14 | 5 | 4 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Sat 9/18 | @ Florida | W 31-29 | 6 | 3 | — | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 9/11 | vs Unknown | — | 8 | 4 | — | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 9/4 | @ MiamiSplash game | W 44-13 | 5 | 2 | — | 2 | 1 | — | 0 | — | — |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Alabama
2019-2021
Opening stop
Season Progression
201920192020202020212021
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 Postseason | Alabama | 8.5 | 26.7 | 6.8 | — |
| 2019 Regular Season | Alabama | 8.5 | 26.7 | 6.8 | 0 |
| 2020 Postseason | Alabama | 14.5 | 38.3 | 11.6 | 6 |
| 2020 Regular Season | Alabama | 14.5 | 38.3 | 11.6 | 0 |
| 2021 Postseason | Alabama | 21.5 | 34.9 | 9.5 | 7 |
| 2021 Regular Season | Alabama | 21.5 | 34.9 | 9.5 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Georgia
Loss with backfield disruption leading the way.
7
Primary metric
7 disruption/tackle impact with 71.8 takeover score.
#2
Michigan
3
Primary metric
Win with 3 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
3 disruption/tackle impact with 61.3 takeover score.
#3
Florida
4
Primary metric
Win with backfield disruption leading the way.
4 disruption/tackle impact with 57.2 takeover score.
#4
Missouri
3
Primary metric
Win with 3 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
3 disruption/tackle impact with 49.7 takeover score.
#5
Kentucky
2
Primary metric
Win with 2 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
2 disruption/tackle impact with 47.3 takeover score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2020 Postseason · Alabama
14.5 primary output · 38.3 efficiency · 11.6 usage
30.4
#2
2020 Regular Season · Alabama
30.4
14.5 primary · 38.3 efficiency · 11.6 usage
#3
2021 Postseason · Alabama
26.4
21.5 primary · 34.9 efficiency · 9.5 usage
Milestones
2
Impact games
5
Splash games
3
10+ tackle games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
4★
Class 2019 · Rating 0.9506
University Lab · Baton Rouge, LA
- Committed To
- Alabama
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2019
Career Facts
1
Career teams
6
Seasons tracked
215
Career Tackles
Data Context
Coverage spans 6 tracked seasons, 40 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.