#11Deshon Stoudemire

WR·Troy·2023

Deshon Stoudemire is a Versatile WR for Troy. Deshon's 2023 season produced 43.9 total EPA across 47 plays.

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 Deshon Stoudemire'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

Receiving

43 Receptions563 Rec yards1 Rec TD13.1 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs WR peers

Efficiency100
Volume17
Explosiveness41
Consistency76
Pass-Down59

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 consistency76th %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.
▸9 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
▸Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.37 from the first to second half of the season.
▸Peak game: 1.90 EPA/play in Wk 4 vs Western Kentucky (SP+ -2).

NIL Market Tier· 2023

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.

Historical Comparables · WR · efficiency + volume + value

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

Player	Team	Yr	Plays	WEPA/play	Line val	Total EPA
Quadree Henderson	Pittsburgh	2016	63	0.530	1.6	33.4

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost

Wk	Opponent	Result	Opp SP+	Rec	Rec Yds	Avg	Rec TD	Long	EPA/play
2	@Kansas State	L13-42	16.2	1	3	3.0	0	3	-0.13
3	vsJames Madison	L14-16	11.8	6	52	8.7	0	26	0.71
4	vsWestern Kentucky	W27-24	-2.0	6	99	16.5	0	30	1.90
5	@Georgia State	W28-7	-6.8	5	51	10.2	0	16	0.77
6	vsArkansas State	W37-3	-6.3	4	98	24.5	0	51	0.42
7	@Army	W19-0	-4.0	1	5	5.0	0	5	-0.20
9	@Texas State	W31-13	-1.6	4	73	18.3	1	26	1.47
10	vsSouth Alabama	W28-10	5.1	6	81	13.5	0	21	1.04
11	@UL Monroe	W45-14	-21.6	1	5	5.0	0	5	1.20
12	vsLouisiana	W31-24	0.4	3	45	15.0	0	27	1.28
13	@Southern Miss	W35-17	-14.4	2	16	8.0	0	13	0.20
14	vsApp State	W49-23	3.8	4	35	8.8	0	15	0.53

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

5.8%

Passing plays

10.9%

Rushing plays

0.5%

Standard downs

4.9%

Passing downs

7.6%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.91
Passing downs: 0.96
Pass / Rush EPA: 1.01 / -0.88

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