Usage Score
13.1
Player Dossier
2025-2025USC
Tanook Hines
WR • 6'0" • 195 lbs • Houston, TX, USA
Vertical playmakerExplosive finisher
Tanook Hines reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
73.5
Consistency
28
Season Value
53.6
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2025 Postseason · USC
2525
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 2
- Program Path
- USC
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: TCU
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.
Tanook Hines, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2025 Postseason · USC. Tanook Hines reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Tanook Hines played WR for USC. Across 1 tracked season, Tanook Hines recorded 561 receiving yards, 1 tackles, and 2 touchdowns. His top tracked season came in 2025 with USC.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2025 Postseason
USC paired 561 primary output with 73.5 efficiency.
Supporting note
2025 Postseason role shape
target-driven usage with 73.5 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2025 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: TCU
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 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.
2025 Postseason · USC
Games
13
Receiving Yards / G
43.2
Efficiency
73.5
Usage
13.1
Consistency
28
Best Game by takeover score
TCU
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.
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. TCU: 163. Missouri State: 11. Georgia Southern: 21. Purdue: 23. Michigan State: 7. Illinois: 33. Michigan: 8. Notre Dame: 67. Nebraska: 41. Northwestern: 10. Iowa: 5. Oregon: 141. UCLA: 31
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. TCU: 6 by 100. Missouri State: 1 by 73.3. Georgia Southern: 3 by 46.7. Purdue: 2 by 76.7. Michigan State: 1 by 46.7. Illinois: 2 by 100. Michigan: 1 by 53.3. Notre Dame: 5 by 89.3. Nebraska: 2 by 100. Northwestern: 1 by 66.7. Iowa: 1 by 33.3. Oregon: 6 by 100. UCLA: 3 by 68.9
Split Comparison
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Wins17.4 · Games = 9 · -83.6 vs Losses
Losses101 · Games = 4 · +83.6 vs Wins
First Half38 · Games = 7 · -11.2 vs Second Half
Second Half49.2 · Games = 6 · +11.2 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
13 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
TCU
Best efficiency game
100 vs TCU
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wed 12/31 | @ TCU100 receiving yards | L 27-30 | — | 6 | 163 | 27.2 | 27.20 | 0 | 46 |
| Sun 11/30 | vs UCLA | W 29-10 | — | 3 | 31 | 10.3 | 10.30 | 0 | 26 |
| Sat 11/22 | @ Oregon100 receiving yards | L 27-42 | — | 6 | 141 | 23.5 | 23.50 | 1 | 51 |
| Sat 11/15 | vs Iowa | W 26-21 | — | 1 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
| Sat 11/8 | vs Northwestern | W 38-17 | — | 1 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
| Sat 11/1 | @ Nebraska | W 21-17 | — | 2 | 41 | 20.5 | 20.50 | 0 | 29 |
| Sat 10/18 | @ Notre Dame | L 24-34 | — | 5 | 67 | 13.4 | 13.40 | 0 | 24 |
| Sat 10/11 | vs Michigan | W 31-13 | — | 1 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
| Sat 9/27 | @ Illinois | L 32-34 | — | 2 | 33 | 16.5 | 16.50 | 0 | 30 |
| Sun 9/21 | vs Michigan State | W 45-31 | — | 1 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 1 | 7 |
| Sat 9/13 | @ Purdue | W 33-17 | — | 2 | 23 | 11.5 | 11.50 | 0 | 25 |
| Sat 9/6 | vs Georgia Southern | W 59-20 | — | 3 | 21 | 7 | 7 | 0 | 8 |
| Sat 8/30 | vs Missouri State | W 73-13 | — | 1 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
USC
2025
Opening stop
Season Progression
20252025
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 Postseason | USC | 561 | 73.5 | 13.1 | — |
| 2025 Regular Season | USC | 561 | 73.5 | 13.1 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
TCU
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
163
Primary metric
163 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#2
Oregon
141
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
141 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#3
Notre Dame
67
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
67 receiving yards with a 89.3 efficiency score.
#4
Nebraska
41
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
41 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#5
Illinois
33
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
33 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2025 Postseason · USC
561 primary output · 73.5 efficiency · 13.1 usage
53.6
#2
2025 Regular Season · USC
53.6
561 primary · 73.5 efficiency · 13.1 usage
Milestones
2
100+ receiving yards
0
8+ catch outings
0
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
4★
Class 2025 · Rating 0.8933
Dekaney · Houston, TX
- Committed To
- USC
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2025
Career Facts
1
Career teams
2
Seasons tracked
561
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 2 tracked seasons, 13 games, and SP opponent-strength context when available. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.