Skip to content
Christian McCaffrey
Christian McCaffrey

#5Christian McCaffrey

RB·Stanford·201620153.7 pts line valueDay 2 (Rds 2–3)

Christian McCaffrey is a 2-year Pass-Catching Back for Stanford. Christian's 2016 season ranks in the 38th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 286 plays — a developing rate for the RB.

What projects, and what doesn't · RBs · 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)0.52
    Beats guessing the RB average by 18%. n=4,219 RB seasons
  • EPA per play (efficiency)0.10
    Not projectable — we do not forecast this. n=3,575 RB seasons
  • Total EPA (value)0.41
    Beats guessing the RB average by 9%. n=3,575 RB seasons

Across all positions, usage carries year to year at 0.47 and efficiency at 0.07. So Christian McCaffrey'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.

2016 Production

Rushing
1603 Rush yards13 Rush TD253 Carries6.3 Yards/carry
Receiving
37 Receptions310 Rec yards3 Rec TD8.4 Yards/rec
Returns
14 Kick returns318 KR yards0 KR TD10 Punt returns96 PR yards0 PR TD

Performance Analysis · 2016 · vs RB peers

  • Efficiency38
  • Volume100
  • Explosiveness66
  • Consistency76
  • Receiving72
Player type
Pass-Catching Back

Third-down weapon out of the backfield. Routes, hands, and separation in coverage define this role as much as rushing.

3rd-down backReceiving threatPass protection
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)38th %ile · below avg
Game-to-game consistency76th %ile · above avg
Key findings
  • Below-average efficiency vs RB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
  • High-volume role — one of the team's most-used RBs by play share.
  • High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
  • 3 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.26 from the first to second half of the season.
  • Peak game: 0.61 EPA/play in Wk 12 vs California (SP+ 2).

Historical Comparables · RB · 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
Saquon BarkleyPenn State0.3403.997.9
Dalvin CookFlorida State0.3404.399.3
Breece HallIowa State0.3404.5102.3
Eno BenjaminArizona State0.3304.6104.3
Jonathan TaylorWisconsin0.3504.8107.4

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+0.6100.61Wk 1 vs Kansas State: +0.07 EPA/play1Wk 3 vs USC: +0.29 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs UCLA: +0.14 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Washington: +0.06 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Washington State: +0.04 EPA/play6Wk 8 vs Colorado: +0.08 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Arizona: +0.44 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs Oregon State: +0.05 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Oregon: +0.43 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs California: +0.61 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Rice: +0.39 EPA/play13
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+CarRush YdsAvgRush TDRecRec YdsRec TDEPA/play
1vsKansas StateW26-138.2221265.7274000.07
3vsUSCW27-1023.6311725.5136610.29
4@UCLAW22-139.1261385.3021300.14
5@WashingtonL6-4426.712494.1053000.06
6vsWashington StateL16-426.28354.401500.04
8vsColoradoL5-106.321924.4022600.08
9@ArizonaW34-10-4.5231697.3242710.44
10vsOregon StateW26-15-4.6321996.212600.05
11@OregonW52-276.1171357.9355200.43
12@CaliforniaW45-312.4312849.2342200.61
13vsRiceW41-17-16.5302046.8122310.39

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
41.5%
Passing plays
16.5%
Rushing plays
61.1%
Standard downs
49.0%
Passing downs
26.7%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.29
Passing downs
0.11
Pass / Rush EPA
0.29 / 0.25

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+0.720−0.192016
EPA per play · 2015 — 2016 · 25 games
SeasonTeamLine valueTotal EPA
2015Stanford
2.4
75.2
2016Stanford
3.7
87.4

Chart shows per-game EPA (bars) and rolling 5-game average (line). Season breaks marked with dashed lines. Line value = est. points over replacement per game.

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