Player Stats

Kezion Dia-Johnson 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
73
Receptions
6
Touchdowns
1

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesRecRec YdsTDOverall
2024 Regular SeasonMassachusetts1-00100
2025 Regular SeasonMassachusetts8673155.1

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2024 Regular Season

Massachusetts paired 0 primary output with — efficiency.

Supporting note

2025 Regular Season role shape

target-driven usage with 69.3 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value cooled off

2025 Regular Season fell back from the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: Central Michigan

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.

2025 Regular Season · Massachusetts

Games

8

Receiving Yards / G

9.1

Efficiency

69.3

Usage

12.9

Consistency

8.3

Best Game by takeover score

Central 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.

12345678

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Temple: 0. Bryant: 0. Iowa: 0. Western Michigan: 0. Kent State: 5. Buffalo: 27. Central Michigan: 41. Akron: 0

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. Kent State: 2 by 16.7. Buffalo: 1 by 100. Central Michigan: 3 by 91.1

Split Comparison

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

First Half0 · Games = 4 · -18.3 vs Second Half
Second Half18.3 · Games = 4 · +18.3 vs First Half