Usage Score
33.8
Player Dossier
2013-2016Wyoming
Tanner Gentry
WR • 6'2" • Aurora, CO, USA
Alpha targetExplosive finisher
Tanner Gentry reads as a alpha target based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
93.9
Consistency
76.6
Season Value
76.1
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2016 Postseason · Wyoming
1314151616
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 5
- Program Path
- Wyoming
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Unknown
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.
Tanner Gentry, WR. Best season Best season by value score: 2016 Postseason · Wyoming. Tanner Gentry reads as a alpha target based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2016 Postseason
Wyoming paired 1,326 primary output with 93.9 efficiency.
Supporting note
2016 Postseason role shape
target-driven usage with 93.9 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2016 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: UNLV
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 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.
2016 Postseason · Wyoming
Games
14
Receiving Yards / G
94.7
Efficiency
93.9
Usage
33.8
Consistency
76.6
Best Game by takeover score
BYU
Hover a point or expand a game row to keep the active game context visible here.
Game-by-Game Trend
1234567891011121314
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. BYU: 113. Northern Illinois: 104. Nebraska: 124. Unknown: 33. Eastern Michigan: 127. Colorado State: 91. Air Force: 24. Nevada: 109. Boise State: 73. Utah State: 93. UNLV: 184. San Diego State: 58. New Mexico: 112. San Diego State: 81
Volume vs Efficiency
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. BYU: 7 by 100. Northern Illinois: 8 by 86.7. Nebraska: 7 by 100. Unknown: 2 by 100. Eastern Michigan: 12 by 70.6. Colorado State: 3 by 100. Air Force: 2 by 80. Nevada: 4 by 100. Boise State: 6 by 81.1. Utah State: 4 by 100. UNLV: 5 by 100. San Diego State: 4 by 96.7. New Mexico: 5 by 100. San Diego State: 3 by 100
Split Comparison
Wins78.9 · n=7 · -44.6 vs Losses
Losses123.5 · n=6 · +44.6 vs Wins
First Half88 · n=7 · -13.4 vs Second Half
Second Half101.4 · n=7 · +13.4 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
14 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
UNLV
Best efficiency game
100 vs BYU
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thu 12/22 | vs BYU100 receiving yards · 2+ TD | L 21-24 | — | 7 | 113 | 16.1 | 16.10 | 2 | 30 |
| Sun 12/4 | vs San Diego State | L 24-27 | — | 3 | 81 | 27 | 27 | 1 | 33 |
| Sun 11/27 | @ New Mexico100 receiving yards | L 35-56 | — | 5 | 112 | 22.4 | 22.40 | 0 | 46 |
| Sat 11/19 | vs San Diego State | W 34-33 | — | 4 | 58 | 13.2 | 14.50 | 0 | 23 |
| Sat 11/12 | @ UNLV100 receiving yards · 2+ TD | L 66-69 | — | 5 | 184 | 36.8 | 36.80 | 3 | 48 |
| Sun 11/6 | vs Utah State2+ TD | W 52-28 | — | 4 | 93 | 23.3 | 23.30 | 2 | 46 |
| Sat 10/29 | vs Boise State | W 30-28 | — | 6 | 73 | 10 | 12.20 | 1 | 27 |
| Sun 10/23 | @ Nevada100 receiving yards | W 42-34 | — | 4 | 109 | 27.3 | 27.30 | 0 | 54 |
| Sat 10/8 | vs Air Force | W 35-26 | — | 2 | 24 | 13 | 12 | 1 | 17 |
| Sun 10/2 | @ Colorado State | W 38-17 | — | 3 | 91 | 30.3 | 30.30 | 1 | 36 |
| Fri 9/23 | @ Eastern Michigan100 receiving yards · High volume | L 24-27 | — | 12 | 127 | 10.6 | 10.60 | 0 | 24 |
| Sat 9/17 | vs Unknown | — | — | 2 | 33 | 16.5 | 16.50 | 1 | 17 |
| Sat 9/10 | @ Nebraska100 receiving yards | L 17-52 | — | 7 | 124 | 17.7 | 17.70 | 1 | 35 |
| Sun 9/4 | vs Northern Illinois100 receiving yards · High volume | W 40-34 | — | 8 | 104 | 10.4 | 13 | 1 | 24 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Wyoming
2013-2016
Opening stop
Season Progression
20132014201520162016
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 Regular Season | Wyoming | 376 | 61.2 | 16.6 | — |
| 2014 Regular Season | Wyoming | 435 | 74.9 | 15 | 59 |
| 2015 Regular Season | Wyoming | 678 | 90.9 | 27.1 | 243 |
| 2016 Postseason | Wyoming | 1,326 | 93.9 | 33.8 | 648 |
| 2016 Regular Season | Wyoming | 1,326 | 93.9 | 33.8 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Unknown
Game with an explosive receiving profile.
176
Primary metric
176 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#2
UNLV
184
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
184 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#3
Colorado State
96
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
96 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#4
Nebraska
124
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
124 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#5
Idaho
76
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
76 receiving yards with a 84.4 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2016 Postseason · Wyoming
1,326 primary output · 93.9 efficiency · 33.8 usage
76.1
#2
2016 Regular Season · Wyoming
76.1
1,326 primary · 93.9 efficiency · 33.8 usage
#3
2015 Regular Season · Wyoming
59.2
678 primary · 90.9 efficiency · 27.1 usage
Milestones
10
100+ receiving yards
6
8+ catch outings
3
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
2★
Class 2013 · Rating 0.7639
Grandview · Aurora, CO
- Committed To
- Wyoming
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2013
Career Facts
1
Career teams
5
Seasons tracked
2,815
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 5 tracked seasons, 42 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.