Skip to content
Jaden Bradley

#6Jaden Bradley

WR·UNLV·2025

Jaden Bradley is a Versatile WR for UNLV. Jaden's 2025 season ranks in the 100th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 100 plays — a elite rate for the WR.

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 Jaden Bradley'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.

2025 Production

Receiving
58 Receptions931 Rec yards4 Rec TD16.1 Yards/rec
Returns
5 Kick returns106 KR yards0 KR TD1 Punt returns36 PR yards1 PR TD

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume31
  • Explosiveness60
  • Consistency62
  • Pass-Down94
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 consistency62th %ile · average
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among WRs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • 7 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Peak game: 1.61 EPA/play in Wk 1 vs Sam Houston (SP+ -28).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

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.

PlayerTeamWEPA/playLine valTotal EPA
Keytaon ThompsonMississippi State0.4601.232.2
DeAndre HughesAir Force0.4701.328.2
Savion WilliamsTCU0.4501.125.2
Quadree HendersonPittsburgh0.5301.633.4
Javion PoseyFlorida Atlantic0.4501.423.8

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+1.6101.61Wk 1 vs Sam Houston: +1.61 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs UCLA: -0.35 EPA/play2Wk 4 vs Miami (OH): +0.74 EPA/play4Wk 6 vs Wyoming: +0.40 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Air Force: +0.70 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Boise State: -0.16 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs New Mexico: -0.22 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Colorado State: +0.81 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Utah State: +0.12 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Hawai'i: +0.78 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Nevada: +1.36 EPA/play14Wk 15 vs Boise State: -0.10 EPA/play15
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
0vsIdaho StateW38-31613121.8047
1vsSam HoustonW38-21-27.8612520.81491.61
2vsUCLAW30-23-8.7166.006-0.35
4@Miami (OH)W41-38-3.479313.31370.74
6@WyomingW31-17-11.356513.00270.40
7vsAir ForceW51-48-3.237324.30560.70
8@Boise StateL31-563.113535.0135-0.16
10vsNew MexicoL35-400.955811.6023-0.22
11@Colorado StateW42-10-15.636421.30370.81
12vsUtah StateW29-26-3.166210.30190.12
13vsHawai'iW38-101.755110.21180.78
14@NevadaW42-17-13.437123.70481.36
15@Boise StateL21-383.133511.7016-0.10
20vsOhioL10-17-4.046215.5023

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
10.9%
Passing plays
22.6%
Rushing plays
0.4%
Standard downs
10.3%
Passing downs
12.3%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.42
Passing downs
0.68
Pass / Rush EPA
0.52 / -0.08

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.