Player Stats

Jared Abbrederis College Stats

Career production, season-by-season totals, and the selected-season workbench are grouped here for stat-first searches.

Stat Footprint

Career production snapshot

Receiving yards
3,140
Receptions
202
Touchdowns
26

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesRecRec YdsTDOverall
2009 Regular SeasonWisconsin0-00-
2010 PostseasonWisconsin11116047.4
2010 Regular SeasonWisconsin1119273347.4
2011 PostseasonWisconsin144119181.4
2011 Regular SeasonWisconsin1451814881.4
2012 PostseasonWisconsin13344079.1
2012 Regular SeasonWisconsin1346793579.1
2013 PostseasonWisconsin13530085.7
2013 Regular SeasonWisconsin13731,051985.7

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2013 Postseason

Wisconsin paired 1,081 primary output with 77.3 efficiency.

Supporting note

2013 Postseason role shape

target-driven usage with 77.3 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value stayed steady

2013 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: Ohio State

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 compare the statistical profile without scrolling through the full player page.

Season Explorer

Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.

2013 Postseason · Wisconsin

Games

13

Receiving Yards / G

83.2

Efficiency

77.3

Usage

36.6

Consistency

65.6

Best Game by takeover score

Ohio State

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.

12345678910111213

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. South Carolina: 30. Massachusetts: 122. Tennessee Tech: 62. Arizona State: 87. Purdue: 94. Ohio State: 207. Northwestern: 74. Illinois: 106. Iowa: 30. BYU: 67. Indiana: 0. Minnesota: 67. Penn State: 135

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. South Carolina: 5 by 40. Massachusetts: 2 by 100. Tennessee Tech: 8 by 51.7. Arizona State: 6 by 96.7. Purdue: 7 by 89.5. Ohio State: 10 by 100. Northwestern: 2 by 100. Illinois: 8 by 88.3. Iowa: 3 by 66.7. BYU: 8 by 55.8. Minnesota: 7 by 63.8. Penn State: 12 by 75

Split Comparison

Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.

Wins69.1 · Games = 9 · -45.6 vs Losses
Losses114.8 · Games = 4 · +45.6 vs Wins