Usage Score
19.3
Player Dossier
2023-2023Oklahoma State
WR • 6'5" • 207 lbs • Bothell, WA, USA
Leon Johnson III reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Usage Score
19.3
Efficiency
83.2
Consistency
62.4
Season Value
66.2
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2023 Postseason · Oklahoma State
Snapshot
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.
Leon Johnson III, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2023 Postseason · Oklahoma State. Leon Johnson III reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2023 Postseason
Oklahoma State paired 539 primary output with 83.2 efficiency.
Supporting note
2023 Postseason role shape
target-driven usage with 83.2 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2023 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Cincinnati
Win with an explosive receiving profile. It landed in the 100th percentile of the selected season.
Analysis workspace
Filter the strongest season sample, inspect game-level shape, and then drop into the full log without losing the story of the year.
Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.
Games
7
Receiving Yards / G
77
Efficiency
83.2
Usage
19.3
Consistency
62.4
Best Game by takeover score
Texas A&M
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Texas A&M: 86. Cincinnati: 149. Oklahoma: 70. UCF: 61. Houston: 34. BYU: 132. Texas: 7
Low volume / high quality
High volume / high quality
Low volume / lower quality
High volume / lower quality
Volume on the x-axis, quality on the y-axis.
Volume versus efficiency scatter chart. Texas A&M: 4 by 100. Cincinnati: 5 by 100. Oklahoma: 5 by 93.3. UCF: 6 by 67.8. Houston: 2 by 100. BYU: 9 by 97.8. Texas: 2 by 23.3
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
7 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
Cincinnati
Best efficiency game
100 vs Texas A&M
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thu 12/28 | vs Texas A&M | W 31-23 | — | 4 | 86 | 21.5 | 21.50 | 0 | 33 |
| Sat 12/2 | @ Texas | L 21-49 | — | 2 | 7 | 3.5 | 3.50 | 0 | 6 |
| Sat 11/25 | vs BYU100 receiving yards · High volume | W 40-34 | — | 9 | 132 | 14.7 | 14.70 | 0 | 24 |
| Sat 11/18 | @ Houston | W 43-30 | — | 2 | 34 | 17 | 17 | 1 | 21 |
| Sat 11/11 | @ UCF | L 3-45 | — | 6 | 61 | 10.2 | 10.20 | 0 | 15 |
| Sat 11/4 | vs Oklahoma | W 27-24 | — | 5 | 70 | 14 | 14 | 0 | 20 |
| Sun 10/29 | vs Cincinnati100 receiving yards | W 45-13 | — | 5 | 149 | 29.8 | 29.80 | 0 | 67 |
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
Oklahoma State
2023
Opening stop
Season Progression
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 Postseason | Oklahoma State | 539 | 83.2 | 19.3 | — |
| 2023 Regular Season | Oklahoma State | 539 | 83.2 | 19.3 | 0 |
#1 Featured game
Cincinnati
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
149
Primary metric
149 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#2
BYU
132
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
132 receiving yards with a 97.8 efficiency score.
#3
Texas A&M
86
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
86 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#4
Oklahoma
70
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
70 receiving yards with a 93.3 efficiency score.
#5
UCF
61
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
61 receiving yards with a 67.8 efficiency score.
#1 Season by value score
2023 Postseason · Oklahoma State
539 primary output · 83.2 efficiency · 19.3 usage
66.2
#2
2023 Regular Season · Oklahoma State
66.2
539 primary · 83.2 efficiency · 19.3 usage
2
100+ receiving yards
1
8+ catch outings
0
2+ TD games
Career Facts
1
Career teams
2
Seasons tracked
539
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 2 tracked seasons, 7 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.
Leon Johnson III quick answers