Player Stats

Joel Caleb 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
62
Receptions
8
Touchdowns
1

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesRecRec YdsTDOverall
2012 Regular SeasonVirginia Tech0-00-
2013 Regular SeasonVirginia Tech42119.4
2014 Regular SeasonVirginia Tech6661059.9
2015 Regular SeasonVirginia Tech0-00-

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2014 Regular Season

Virginia Tech paired 61 primary output with 64.7 efficiency.

Supporting note

2014 Regular Season role shape

target-driven usage with 64.7 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value cooled off

2015 Regular Season fell back from the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: Pittsburgh

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.

2014 Regular Season · Virginia Tech

Games

6

Receiving Yards / G

10.2

Efficiency

64.7

Usage

5.6

Consistency

56

Best Game by takeover score

Pittsburgh

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.

123456

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. William & Mary: 3. Georgia Tech: 7. Western Michigan: 13. North Carolina: 0. Pittsburgh: 25. Miami: 13

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. William & Mary: 1 by 20. Georgia Tech: 1 by 46.7. Western Michigan: 1 by 86.7. Pittsburgh: 2 by 83.3. Miami: 1 by 86.7

Split Comparison

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

Wins5.3 · Games = 3 · -9.7 vs Losses
Losses15 · Games = 3 · +9.7 vs Wins