Skip to content
Chris Lawson

#8Chris Lawson

Chris Lawson is a Versatile WR for Washington.

What projects, and what doesn't · WRs · held out 2019-2025

How well one season predicts the next, measured on seasons the model never trained on. 1.00 would be perfectly predictable; 0.00 means last year told us nothing.

  • Usage share (volume)0.47
    Beats guessing the WR average by 16%. n=6,302 WR seasons
  • EPA per play (efficiency)0.09
    Not projectable — we do not forecast this. n=5,767 WR seasons
  • Total EPA (value)0.45
    Beats guessing the WR average by 12%. n=5,767 WR seasons

Across all positions, usage carries year to year at 0.47 and efficiency at 0.07. So Chris Lawson's projection is a projection of opportunity — how much of the offense he runs through. How well he converts it is something this model does not claim to know a year in advance, and the number above is why.

2025 Production

Receiving
10 Receptions115 Rec yards0 Rec TD11.5 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume9
  • Explosiveness30
  • Consistency34
  • Pass-Down100
Player type
Versatile WR

Balanced profile without a single dominant trait — contributes across multiple dimensions.

Balanced usageMulti-role
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)100th %ile · elite
Game-to-game consistency34th %ile · below avg
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among WRs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • High game-to-game variance — boom-or-bust profile.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.46 from the first to second half of the season.
  • Peak game: 1.22 EPA/play in Wk 13 vs UCLA (SP+ -9).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

On3 valuation ↗
Star

Top-10 nationally. Multiple mid-to-large collective deals expected.

Tier is a model estimate based on position, school brand, performance rank, and usage — not a reported deal. NIL deals are private. For a real market valuation, see On3's NIL profile, which factors in social following and actual deal tracking.

Historical Comparables · WR · efficiency + volume + value

Players from 2013–2025 matched on EPA efficiency, play volume, and adjusted value tier — not just one metric.

PlayerTeamWEPA/playLine valTotal EPA
Dane KinamonAir Force0.4100.716.0
Keytaon ThompsonVirginia0.3700.615.2
Micah DavisAir Force0.3700.616.3
JoJo NatsonUtah State0.3901.019.9
Keytaon ThompsonVirginia0.3200.412.5

Comps are statistical — efficiency, volume, and value tier all factor in. Style and conference context differ.

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+1.2201.22Wk 2 vs UC Davis: +0.09 EPA/play2Wk 7 vs Rutgers: +0.43 EPA/play7Wk 9 vs Illinois: -0.04 EPA/play9Wk 11 vs Wisconsin: -0.34 EPA/play11Wk 13 vs UCLA: +1.22 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Oregon: +0.01 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
2vsUC DavisW70-1012222.00220.09
7vsRutgersW38-191.02178.50120.43
9vsIllinoisW42-2512.92115.5011-0.04
11@WisconsinL10-13-4.4133.003-0.34
13@UCLAW48-14-8.723919.50421.22
14vsOregonL14-2625.9155.0050.01
20vsBoise StateW38-103.111818.0018

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
3.0%
Passing plays
6.4%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
2.7%
Passing downs
3.7%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.14
Passing downs
0.99
Pass / Rush EPA
0.42 / —

Usage = share of team plays (CFBD has no true snap counts).

EPA = expected points added (opponent-adjusted). NIL estimates are model-based ranges, not reported deals. Data: CollegeFootballData. Not betting advice.