Skip to content
Kamdyn Benjamin

#18Kamdyn Benjamin

WR·Tulsa·2024

Kamdyn Benjamin is a Versatile WR for Tulsa. Kamdyn's 2024 season ranks in the 100th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 69 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 Kamdyn Benjamin'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.

2024 Production

Receiving
70 Receptions822 Rec yards6 Rec TD11.7 Yards/rec
Returns
21 Punt returns178 PR yards1 PR TD

Performance Analysis · 2024 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume28
  • Explosiveness32
  • Consistency70
  • Pass-Down100
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 consistency70th %ile · average
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.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Production faded as the season progressed — 0.73 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 2.60 EPA/play in Wk 1 vs Northwestern State.

NIL Market Tier· 2024

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
Quadree HendersonPittsburgh0.5301.633.4
DeAndre HughesAir Force0.4701.328.2
Keytaon ThompsonMississippi State0.4601.232.2
Savion WilliamsTCU0.4501.125.2
Bert Emanuel Jr.Central Michigan0.4601.624.4

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+2.6002.60Wk 1 vs Northwestern State: +2.60 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Arkansas State: +1.80 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Oklahoma State: +1.08 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Louisiana Tech: +0.73 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs North Texas: +1.06 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Army: +0.21 EPA/play6Wk 8 vs Temple: +0.64 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs UTSA: +1.51 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs UAB: +1.07 EPA/play10Wk 12 vs East Carolina: -1.05 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs South Florida: +0.90 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Florida Atlantic: +0.06 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1vsNorthwestern StateW62-2856513.01362.60
2@Arkansas StateL24-28-9.9613121.81451.80
3vsOklahoma StateL10-45-2.669415.70371.08
4@Louisiana TechW23-20-11.68698.60210.73
5@North TexasL20-52-4.57689.70191.06
6vsArmyL7-499.27446.30160.21
8@TempleL10-20-20.33299.70160.64
9vsUTSAW46-452.2712517.93741.51
10@UABL21-59-11.36589.70201.07
12vsEast CarolinaL31-38-1.03113.705-1.05
13@South FloridaL30-63-2.346115.30360.90
14vsFlorida AtlanticL16-63-12.78678.41210.06

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
9.8%
Passing plays
18.4%
Rushing plays
0.9%
Standard downs
9.1%
Passing downs
11.2%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.59
Passing downs
1.11
Pass / Rush EPA
0.84 / -0.50

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.