Usage Score
17.4
Player Dossier
2013-2016Virginia Tech
Bucky Hodges
TE • 6'7" • Virginia Beach, VA, USA
Vertical playmakerExplosive finisher
Bucky Hodges reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
79.4
Consistency
62.6
Season Value
64.9
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2016 Postseason · Virginia Tech
13141415151616
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 7
- Program Path
- Virginia Tech
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Western Michigan
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.
Bucky Hodges, TE. Best season Best season by value score: 2016 Postseason · Virginia Tech. Bucky Hodges reads as a vertical playmaker based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2016 Postseason
Virginia Tech paired 691 primary output with 79.4 efficiency.
Supporting note
2016 Postseason role shape
target-driven usage with 79.4 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: Pittsburgh
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 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 · Virginia Tech
Games
14
Receiving Yards / G
49.4
Efficiency
79.4
Usage
17.4
Consistency
62.6
Best Game by takeover score
Arkansas
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. Arkansas: 51. Unknown: 42. Tennessee: 13. Boston College: 48. East Carolina: 47. North Carolina: 28. Syracuse: 79. Miami: 66. Pittsburgh: 145. Duke: 24. Georgia Tech: 22. Notre Dame: 15. Virginia: 69. Clemson: 42
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. Arkansas: 5 by 68. Unknown: 3 by 93.3. Tennessee: 3 by 28.9. Boston College: 4 by 80. East Carolina: 2 by 100. North Carolina: 1 by 100. Syracuse: 5 by 100. Miami: 7 by 62.9. Pittsburgh: 6 by 100. Duke: 2 by 80. Georgia Tech: 3 by 48.9. Notre Dame: 2 by 50. Virginia: 4 by 100. Clemson: 1 by 100
Split Comparison
Wins54.8 · n=9 · +15.8 vs Losses
Losses39 · n=4 · -15.8 vs Wins
First Half44 · n=7 · -10.7 vs Second Half
Second Half54.7 · n=7 · +10.7 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
Pittsburgh
Best efficiency game
100 vs Clemson
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thu 12/29 | vs Arkansas | W 35-24 | — | 5 | 51 | 8.7 | 10.20 | 0 | 15 |
| Sun 12/4 | vs Clemson | L 35-42 | — | 1 | 42 | 42 | 42 | 0 | 42 |
| Sat 11/26 | vs Virginia | W 52-10 | — | 4 | 69 | 17.3 | 17.30 | 1 | 42 |
| Sat 11/19 | @ Notre Dame | W 34-31 | — | 2 | 15 | 7.5 | 7.50 | 1 | 8 |
| Sat 11/12 | vs Georgia Tech | L 20-30 | — | 3 | 22 | 7.3 | 7.30 | 0 | 11 |
| Sat 11/5 | @ Duke | W 24-21 | — | 2 | 24 | 8 | 12 | 0 | 20 |
| Thu 10/27 | @ Pittsburgh100 receiving yards | W 39-36 | — | 6 | 145 | 24.2 | 24.20 | 0 | 36 |
| Thu 10/20 | vs Miami2+ TD | W 37-16 | — | 7 | 66 | 9.4 | 9.40 | 2 | 18 |
| Sat 10/15 | @ Syracuse | L 17-31 | — | 5 | 79 | 14.2 | 15.80 | 1 | 27 |
| Sat 10/8 | @ North Carolina | W 34-3 | — | 1 | 28 | 28 | 28 | 0 | 28 |
| Sat 9/24 | vs East Carolina | W 54-17 | — | 2 | 47 | 23.5 | 23.50 | 0 | 35 |
| Sat 9/17 | vs Boston College | W 49-0 | — | 4 | 48 | 12 | 12 | 0 | 17 |
| Sun 9/11 | @ Tennessee | L 24-45 | — | 3 | 13 | 5 | 4.30 | 0 | 11 |
| Sat 9/3 | vs Unknown2+ TD | — | — | 3 | 42 | 11.5 | 14 | 2 | 20 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Virginia Tech
2013-2016
Opening stop
Season Progression
2013201420142015201520162016
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 Regular Season | Virginia Tech | 0 | — | — | — |
| 2014 Postseason | Virginia Tech | 526 | 68.5 | 18.7 | 526 |
| 2014 Regular Season | Virginia Tech | 526 | 68.5 | 18.7 | 0 |
| 2015 Postseason | Virginia Tech | 530 | 79.5 | 19.1 | 4 |
| 2015 Regular Season | Virginia Tech | 530 | 79.5 | 19.1 | 0 |
| 2016 Postseason | Virginia Tech | 691 | 79.4 | 17.4 | 161 |
| 2016 Regular Season | Virginia Tech | 691 | 79.4 | 17.4 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Western Michigan
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
88
Primary metric
88 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#2
Pittsburgh
145
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
145 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#3
Duke
101
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
101 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#4
East Carolina
73
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
73 receiving yards with a 97.3 efficiency score.
#5
Virginia
61
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
61 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2016 Postseason · Virginia Tech
691 primary output · 79.4 efficiency · 17.4 usage
64.9
#2
2016 Regular Season · Virginia Tech
64.9
691 primary · 79.4 efficiency · 17.4 usage
#3
2015 Postseason · Virginia Tech
60.6
530 primary · 79.5 efficiency · 19.1 usage
Milestones
2
100+ receiving yards
0
8+ catch outings
4
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
4★
Class 2013 · Rating 0.9083
Salem · Virginia Beach, VA
- Committed To
- Virginia Tech
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2013
Career Facts
1
Career teams
7
Seasons tracked
1,747
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 7 tracked seasons, 39 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.