Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2015 Postseason
Cincinnati paired 982 primary output with 71.1 efficiency.
Player Stats
Career production, season-by-season totals, and the selected-season workbench are grouped here for stat-first searches.
Stat Footprint
Season Ledger
| Season | Team | Games | Rec | Rec Yds | TD | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 Regular Season | Cincinnati | 2 | 3 | 14 | 0 | 29.7 |
| 2012 Regular Season | Cincinnati | 1 | 3 | 23 | 0 | 50.9 |
| 2013 Postseason | Cincinnati | 13 | 3 | 36 | 1 | 70.9 |
| 2013 Regular Season | Cincinnati | 13 | 75 | 747 | 2 | 70.9 |
| 2014 Postseason | Cincinnati | 13 | 5 | 100 | 0 | 71 |
| 2014 Regular Season | Cincinnati | 13 | 61 | 661 | 4 | 71 |
| 2015 Postseason | Cincinnati | 13 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 82.6 |
| 2015 Regular Season | Cincinnati | 13 | 88 | 971 | 6 | 82.6 |
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2015 Postseason
Cincinnati paired 982 primary output with 71.1 efficiency.
Supporting note
2015 Postseason role shape
target-driven usage with 71.1 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2015 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: BYU
Loss with an explosive receiving profile. It landed in the 76.9th percentile of the selected season.
Analysis workspace
Filter the strongest season sample, inspect game-level shape, and compare the statistical profile without scrolling through the full player page.
Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.
Games
13
Receiving Yards / G
75.5
Efficiency
71.1
Usage
26.2
Consistency
71.8
Best Game by takeover score
BYU
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. San Diego State: 11. Alabama A&M: 69. Temple: 53. Miami (OH): 44. Memphis: 120. Miami: 106. BYU: 103. UConn: 78. UCF: 72. Houston: 59. Tulsa: 91. South Florida: 52. East Carolina: 124
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. San Diego State: 2 by 36.7. Alabama A&M: 7 by 65.7. Temple: 6 by 58.9. Miami (OH): 4 by 73.3. Memphis: 9 by 88.9. Miami: 8 by 88.3. BYU: 5 by 100. UConn: 8 by 65. UCF: 8 by 60. Houston: 4 by 98.3. Tulsa: 8 by 75.8. South Florida: 6 by 57.8. East Carolina: 15 by 55.1
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Next best actions
Move from the player story into the game log, career arc, team context, and video shelf.