Player Stats

Alonzo Russell 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
3,076
Receptions
202
Touchdowns
24

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesRecRec YdsTDOverall
2012 PostseasonToledo13235081.9
2012 Regular SeasonToledo1354925581.9
2013 Regular SeasonToledo1259728677.6
2014 PostseasonToledo13449072.6
2014 Regular SeasonToledo1347721872.6
2015 PostseasonToledo12332069.5
2015 Regular SeasonToledo1233586569.5

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2012 Postseason

Toledo paired 960 primary output with 92.8 efficiency.

Supporting note

2015 Postseason role shape

target-driven usage with 95.3 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value stayed steady

2015 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: Massachusetts

Win 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.

2015 Postseason · Toledo

Games

12

Receiving Yards / G

51.5

Efficiency

95.3

Usage

15.4

Consistency

66.8

Best Game by takeover score

Massachusetts

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.

123456789101112

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Temple: 32. Arkansas: 32. Iowa State: 32. Arkansas State: 60. Ball State: 45. Kent State: 58. Eastern Michigan: 43. Massachusetts: 96. Northern Illinois: 30. Central Michigan: 86. Bowling Green: 74. Western Michigan: 30

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. Temple: 3 by 71.1. Arkansas: 1 by 100. Iowa State: 2 by 100. Arkansas State: 5 by 80. Ball State: 2 by 100. Kent State: 4 by 96.7. Eastern Michigan: 3 by 95.6. Massachusetts: 5 by 100. Northern Illinois: 2 by 100. Central Michigan: 4 by 100. Bowling Green: 3 by 100. Western Michigan: 2 by 100

Split Comparison

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

Wins55.8 · Games = 10 · +25.8 vs Losses
Losses30 · Games = 2 · -25.8 vs Wins