Player Stats

DeAnthony Arnett 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
435
Receptions
36
Touchdowns
4

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesRecRec YdsTDOverall
2011 Regular SeasonTennessee724242269.1
2012 Regular SeasonMichigan State3369040.9
2013 Regular SeasonMichigan State117042.3
2014 Regular SeasonMichigan State2211039.8
2015 PostseasonMichigan State4121056.8
2015 Regular SeasonMichigan State4585256.8

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2011 Regular Season

Tennessee paired 242 primary output with 65.1 efficiency.

Supporting note

2015 Postseason role shape

target-driven usage with 88.3 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value stayed steady

2015 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 Tennessee, Michigan State.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: Western Michigan

Win with an explosive receiving profile. It landed in the 75th 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.

2015 Postseason · Michigan State

Games

4

Receiving Yards / G

26.5

Efficiency

88.3

Usage

8.4

Consistency

67

Best Game by takeover score

Western Michigan

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.

1234

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Alabama: 21. Western Michigan: 36. Air Force: 8. Rutgers: 41

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. Alabama: 1 by 100. Western Michigan: 2 by 100. Air Force: 1 by 53.3. Rutgers: 2 by 100

Split Comparison

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

Wins28.3 · Games = 3 · +7.3 vs Losses
Losses21 · Games = 1 · -7.3 vs Wins