Skip to content
Haynes King

#10Haynes King

QB·Georgia Tech·2025202310.6 pts line valueDay 2 (Rds 2–3)

Haynes King is a 2-year Dual-Threat QB for Georgia Tech. Haynes's 2023 season ranks in the 63th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 440 plays — a average rate for the QB.

What projects, and what doesn't · QBs · 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)0.46
    Beats guessing the QB average by 16%. n=2,421 QB seasons
  • EPA per play (efficiency)0.05
    Not projectable — we do not forecast this. n=1,965 QB seasons
  • Total EPA (value)0.51
    Beats guessing the QB average by 20%. n=1,965 QB seasons

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

Passing
226/367 Comp/Att2842 Pass yards27 Pass TD16 INT61.6% Comp %
Rushing
737 Rush yards10 Rush TD120 Carries6.1 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs QB peers

  • Efficiency63
  • Volume100
  • Dual-Threat100
  • Consistency88
  • Clutch91
Player type
Dual-Threat QB

A genuine rushing threat who stresses defenses horizontally. Extends plays with legs and forces extra gap assignments.

Rushing threatScrambles for valueStresses defensive structure
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)63th %ile · average
Game-to-game consistency88th %ile · above avg
Key findings
  • High-volume role — one of the team's most-used QBs by play share.
  • High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
  • 9 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Peak game: 0.72 EPA/play in Wk 9 vs North Carolina (SP+ 7).

NIL Market Tier· 2023

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 · QB · 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
Stetson BennettGeorgia0.63512.5323.0
Tanner MordecaiSMU0.63014.0321.5
Ryan HigginsLouisiana Tech0.58613.7334.6
Malik CunninghamLouisville0.68114.7341.6
Kaidon SalterLiberty0.71114.7345.6

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+0.7200.72Wk 1 vs Louisville: +0.43 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs South Carolina State: +0.66 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Ole Miss: +0.44 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Wake Forest: +0.54 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Bowling Green: +0.47 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Miami: +0.24 EPA/play6Wk 8 vs Boston College: +0.57 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs North Carolina: +0.72 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs Virginia: +0.62 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Clemson: +0.14 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Syracuse: +0.60 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Georgia: +0.11 EPA/play13
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+C/ATTPass YdsPass TDINTQBRRush YdsRush TDEPA/play
1vsLouisvilleL34-398.019/323133177.35300.43
2vsSouth Carolina StateW48-1321/292904084.0000.66
3@Ole MissL23-4818.428/413072067.64210.44
4@Wake ForestW30-16-7.916/272222169.75300.54
5vsBowling GreenL27-38-7.823/373484235.02800.47
6@MiamiW23-209.612/251511259.44610.24
8vsBoston CollegeL23-38-5.914/322041342.315010.57
9vsNorth CarolinaW46-427.423/302874195.49000.72
10@VirginiaW45-17-10.823/302081095.08320.62
11@ClemsonL21-4210.513/311292410.1-310.14
12vsSyracuseW31-22-4.416/201382189.88210.60
13vsGeorgiaL23-3131.211/201580059.52420.11
20vsUCFW30-173.47/13871183.0891

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
54.5%
Passing plays
96.8%
Rushing plays
21.7%
Standard downs
46.1%
Passing downs
73.2%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.36
Passing downs
0.61
Pass / Rush EPA
0.44 / 0.54

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+0.790−0.012025
EPA per play · 2023 — 2025 · 25 games
SeasonTeamLine valueTotal EPA
2023Georgia Tech
10.6
274.8
2025Georgia Tech
7.8
212.8

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.