Usage Score
4.7
Player Dossier
2012-2017BYU
Micah Hannemann
DB • 6'0" • 190 lbs • Alpine, UT, USA
Ball-hunting defenderSplash play profile
Micah Hannemann shows a ball-hunting defender profile with 23.2 disruption score.
Efficiency
23.2
Consistency
10
Season Value
11.5
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2017 Regular Season · BYU
12131415161617
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 7
- Program Path
- BYU
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Missouri
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.
Micah Hannemann, DB. Best season Best season by value score: 2017 Regular Season · BYU. Micah Hannemann shows a ball-hunting defender profile with 23.2 disruption score.
Micah Hannemann played DB for BYU. Across 6 tracked seasons, Micah Hannemann recorded 74 tackles and 2 touchdowns. His top tracked season came in 2017 with BYU.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2017 Regular Season
BYU paired 4 primary output with 23.2 efficiency.
Supporting note
2017 Regular Season role shape
impact-led usage with 23.2 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2017 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: UNLV
Win with 2 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet. 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.
2017 Regular Season · BYU
Games
10
Havoc Plays / G
0.4
Efficiency
23.2
Usage
4.7
Consistency
10
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.
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. LSU: 0. Unknown: 0. Wisconsin: 0. Utah State: 1. Boise State: 0. Mississippi State: 0. East Carolina: 1. San José State: 0. UNLV: 2. Massachusetts: 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. LSU: 4 by 16.7. Unknown: 1 by 4.2. Wisconsin: 7 by 29.2. Utah State: 5 by 30.8. Boise State: 3 by 12.5. Mississippi State: 6 by 25. East Carolina: 3 by 22.5. San José State: 3 by 12.5. UNLV: 9 by 57.5. Massachusetts: 5 by 20.8
Split Comparison
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Wins1 · Games = 2 · +0.7 vs Losses
Losses0.3 · Games = 7 · -0.7 vs Wins
First Half0.2 · Games = 5 · -0.4 vs Second Half
Second Half0.6 · Games = 5 · +0.4 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
10 games
Featured metric
Havoc Plays
Top game by takeover score
UNLV
Best efficiency game
57.5 vs UNLV
| Result | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 11/18 | vs Massachusetts | L 10-16 | 5 | 3 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 11/11 | @ UNLV | W 31-21 | 9 | 7 | — | 1 | 0 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Sat 10/28 | vs San José State | W 41-20 | 3 | 3 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 10/21 | @ East Carolina | L 17-33 | 3 | 1 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Sat 10/14 | @ Mississippi State | L 10-35 | 6 | 4 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 10/7 | vs Boise State | L 7-24 | 3 | 2 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 9/30 | @ Utah State | L 24-40 | 5 | 0 | — | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 9/16 | vs Wisconsin | L 6-40 | 7 | 4 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sun 9/3 | @ LSU | L 0-27 | 4 | 2 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 8/26 | vs Unknown | — | 1 | 1 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
BYU
2012-2017
Opening stop
Season Progression
2012201320142015201620162017
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2012 Regular Season | BYU | 0 | — | — | — |
| 2013 Regular Season | BYU | 0 | — | — | 0 |
| 2014 Regular Season | BYU | 0 | — | — | 0 |
| 2015 Regular Season | BYU | 2 | 5.7 | — | 2 |
| 2016 Postseason | BYU | 6 | 14.7 | 2.2 | 4 |
| 2016 Regular Season | BYU | 6 | 14.7 | 2.2 | 0 |
| 2017 Regular Season | BYU | 4 | 23.2 | 4.7 | -2 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Missouri
Loss with 1 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
1
Primary metric
1 disruption/tackle impact with 60 takeover score.
#2
Nebraska
1
Primary metric
Win with 1 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
1 disruption/tackle impact with 60 takeover score.
#3
UNLV
2
Primary metric
Win with 2 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
2 disruption/tackle impact with 59.1 takeover score.
#4
Mississippi State
3
Primary metric
Win with 3 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
3 disruption/tackle impact with 49.7 takeover score.
#5
Utah State
1
Primary metric
Loss with 1 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
1 disruption/tackle impact with 29.2 takeover score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2017 Regular Season · BYU
4 primary output · 23.2 efficiency · 4.7 usage
11.5
#2
2016 Postseason · BYU
10.1
6 primary · 14.7 efficiency · 2.2 usage
#3
2016 Regular Season · BYU
10.1
6 primary · 14.7 efficiency · 2.2 usage
Milestones
2
Impact games
0
Splash games
0
10+ tackle games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
2★
Class 2012 · Rating 0.7333
Lone Peak · American Fork, UT
- Committed To
- BYU
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2012
Career Facts
1
Career teams
7
Seasons tracked
74
Career Tackles
Data Context
Coverage spans 7 tracked seasons, 29 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.