Skip to content
D.J. Williams

D.J. Williams

D.J. Williams is a Explosive Back for Arizona. D.J.'s 2023 season ranks in the 3th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 79 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 D.J. Williams'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.

2023 Production

Rushing
372 Rush yards5 Rush TD85 Carries4.4 Yards/carry
Receiving
1 Receptions2 Rec yards0 Rec TD2.0 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs RB peers

  • Efficiency3
  • Volume31
  • Explosiveness28
  • Consistency0
  • Receiving3
Player type
Explosive Back

Elite per-carry efficiency — breaks big runs and creates chunk plays at a top rate while in a limited role.

Big-play threatHigh EPA per carryCapitalises on opportunities
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)3th %ile · below avg
Game-to-game consistency0th %ile · below avg
Key findings
  • Below-average efficiency vs RB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
  • High game-to-game variance — boom-or-bust profile.
  • 3 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 — 0.16 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 0.74 EPA/play in Wk 3 vs UTEP (SP+ -16).

NIL Market Tier· 2023

On3 valuation ↗
Starter

Meaningful starter. Local collective + position-group 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

+0.7400.74Wk 1 vs Northern Arizona: -0.18 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Mississippi State: -0.63 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs UTEP: +0.74 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Stanford: +0.41 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Washington: +0.46 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs USC: -0.10 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Washington State: -0.00 EPA/play7Wk 9 vs Oregon State: +0.32 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs UCLA: -0.36 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Colorado: +0.34 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Utah: -0.53 EPA/play12
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+CarRush YdsAvgRush TDRecRec YdsRec TDEPA/play
1vsNorthern ArizonaW38-36386.30120-0.18
2@Mississippi StateL24-310.51-1-1.00-0.63
3vsUTEPW31-10-16.25459.000.74
4@StanfordW21-20-11.911393.510.41
5vsWashingtonL24-3116.410434.300.46
6@USCL41-439.410454.50-0.10
7@Washington StateW44-64.912373.11-0.00
9vsOregon StateW27-2412.68516.400.32
10vsUCLAW27-109.76172.80-0.36
11@ColoradoW34-31-4.99333.720.34
12vsUtahW42-188.51-2-2.00-0.53
20vsOklahomaW38-2415.06274.51

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
10.8%
Passing plays
0.2%
Rushing plays
24.3%
Standard downs
14.2%
Passing downs
2.2%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.15
Passing downs
1.05
Pass / Rush EPA
— / 0.21

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.