Skip to content
Lynn Bowden Jr.

#1Lynn Bowden Jr.

WR·Kentucky·20196.3 pts line value1st Round

Lynn Bowden Jr. is a Workhorse Receiver WR for Kentucky. Lynn's 2019 season ranks in the 90th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 302 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 Lynn Bowden Jr.'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.

2019 Production

Passing
35/74 Comp/Att403 Pass yards3 Pass TD3 INT47.3% Comp %
Rushing
1468 Rush yards13 Rush TD185 Carries7.9 Yards/carry
Receiving
30 Receptions348 Rec yards1 Rec TD11.6 Yards/rec
Returns
9 Kick returns220 KR yards0 KR TD4 Punt returns53 PR yards0 PR TD

Performance Analysis · 2019 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency90
  • Volume100
  • Explosiveness31
  • Consistency69
  • Pass-Down98
Player type
Workhorse Receiver WR

The primary target in the offense — used across all situations and down-types at an elite volume.

Top target shareAll-down utilityOffense runs through this player
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)90th %ile · elite
Game-to-game consistency69th %ile · average
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among WRs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • High-volume role — one of the team's most-used WRs by play share.
  • 4 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.15 from the first to second half of the season.
  • Peak game: 0.89 EPA/play in Wk 14 vs Louisville (SP+ 0).

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
Zach AbeyNavy0.3702.9101.8

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+0.8900.89Wk 1 vs Toledo: +0.27 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Eastern Michigan: +0.16 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Florida: +0.33 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Mississippi State: +0.32 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs South Carolina: -0.01 EPA/play5Wk 7 vs Arkansas: +0.52 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Georgia: -0.26 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Missouri: +0.38 EPA/play9Wk 11 vs Tennessee: -0.18 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Vanderbilt: +0.49 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs UT Martin: +0.54 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Louisville: +0.89 EPA/play14Wk 1 vs Virginia Tech: +0.34 EPA/play1
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1vsToledoW38-24-13.767712.80300.27
2vsEastern MichiganW38-17-8.67547.71140.16
3vsFloridaL21-2924.077010.00210.33
4@Mississippi StateL13-283.5712918.40390.32
5@South CarolinaL7-244.83186.0013-0.01
7vsArkansasW24-20-10.60.52
8@GeorgiaL0-2126.8-0.26
9vsMissouriW29-77.80.38
11vsTennesseeL13-1710.8-0.18
12@VanderbiltW38-14-10.40.49
13vsUT MartinW50-70.54
14vsLouisvilleW45-130.20.89
1vsVirginia TechW37-308.00.34

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
37.4%
Passing plays
49.6%
Rushing plays
32.1%
Standard downs
35.0%
Passing downs
42.5%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.15
Passing downs
0.44
Pass / Rush EPA
0.06 / 0.40

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+1.000−0.38
EPA per play · 2019 · 13 games

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.