Skip to content
Christian Dremel
Christian Dremel

#6Christian Dremel

WR·Rutgers·2024

Christian Dremel is a Versatile WR for Rutgers.

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 Christian Dremel'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.

2024 Production

Receiving
12 Receptions162 Rec yards1 Rec TD13.5 Yards/rec
Returns
1 Kick returns18 KR yards0 KR TD9 Punt returns150 PR yards0 PR TD

Performance Analysis · 2024 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume8
  • Explosiveness43
  • Consistency85
  • 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 consistency85th %ile · above 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 consistency — reliable floor each week.
  • ▸5 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • ▸Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • ▸Production faded as the season progressed — 0.43 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • ▸Peak game: 2.29 EPA/play in Wk 9 vs USC (SP+ 12).

NIL Market Tier· 2024

On3 valuation ↗
Elite

Top-3 player at position nationally. Collective + national brand deals.

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.

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+2.290−2.29Wk 1 vs Howard: +1.53 EPA/play1Wk 7 vs Wisconsin: +2.19 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs UCLA: +1.11 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs USC: +2.29 EPA/play9Wk 11 vs Minnesota: +1.89 EPA/play11Wk 13 vs Illinois: +0.12 EPA/play13
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1vsHowardW44-7——————1.53
2vsAkronW49-17-17.9——————
5vsWashingtonW21-183.1——————
6@NebraskaL7-145.5——————
7vsWisconsinL7-423.025427.00362.19
8vsUCLAL32-35-1.33268.70111.11
9@USCL20-4211.923919.51252.29
11vsMinnesotaW26-1910.411717.00171.89
13vsIllinoisL31-389.63113.7060.12
14@Michigan StateW41-14-4.6——————
20vsKansas StateL41-4414.111515.0015—

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
2.8%
Passing plays
5.5%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
3.8%
Passing downs
0.7%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
1.23
Passing downs
1.87
Pass / Rush EPA
1.29 / —

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.