Skip to content
Jalen Smith

#8Jalen Smith

Jalen Smith is a Slot Specialist WR for Minnesota. Jalen's 2025 season ranks in the 100th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 53 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 Jalen Smith'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
28 Receptions419 Rec yards4 Rec TD15.0 Yards/rec

Air yards

Where the ball goes, and how much of the gain is the throw rather than the run after it.

14
Targets
8.9y
Avg depth
3.4y
After catch
57%
Catch rate

The ball travels 8.9 yards in the air on an average target about the median for the position. Another 3.4 comes after the catch.

Where he is targeted

targets · completion rate · yards
deep
0
0
1
0% · 0y
short
2
50% · 8y
3
33% · 20y
8
75% · 49y
leftmiddleright

Depth and direction come from CFBD’s passing detail, which is backfilled after the games: this covers weeks 1–2 only. Spikes, throwaways and intentional grounding are excluded before any average.

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume23
  • Explosiveness53
  • Consistency50
  • Pass-Down100
Player type
Slot Specialist WR

The offense's primary passing-down weapon — routes, separation, and reliability on 3rd down define this role.

3rd-down converterRoute technicianHigh passing-down share
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)100th %ile · elite
Game-to-game consistency50th %ile · average
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among WRs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • 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 — 0.84 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 1.70 EPA/play in Wk 8 vs Nebraska (SP+ 6).

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
DeAndre HughesAir Force0.4701.328.2
Quadree HendersonPittsburgh0.5301.633.4
Savion WilliamsTCU0.4501.125.2
Keytaon ThompsonMississippi State0.4601.232.2
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

+1.7001.70Wk 1 vs Buffalo: +1.18 EPA/play1Wk 5 vs Rutgers: +1.23 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Ohio State: +0.07 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Purdue: -0.19 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Nebraska: +1.70 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs Michigan State: +0.39 EPA/play10Wk 12 vs Oregon: -0.08 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Northwestern: -0.31 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Wisconsin: -0.16 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1vsBuffaloW23-10-7.527638.01601.18
5vsRutgersW31-281.0410325.81781.23
6@Ohio StateL3-4230.13196.30100.07
7vsPurdueW27-20-6.111414.0014-0.19
8vsNebraskaW24-66.235919.70351.70
10vsMichigan StateW23-20-3.42178.50130.39
12@OregonL13-4225.94399.8026-0.08
13vsNorthwesternL35-385.822412.0020-0.31
14vsWisconsinW17-7-4.4144.004-0.16
20vsNew MexicoW20-170.966410.7217

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
8.1%
Passing plays
14.5%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
6.3%
Passing downs
11.8%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.38
Passing downs
0.71
Pass / Rush EPA
0.54 / —

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.