#11Silas Bolden

WR·Oregon State·2023

Silas Bolden is a Versatile WR for Oregon State. Silas's 2023 season ranks in the 100th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 66 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 Silas Bolden'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

Receiving

54 Receptions746 Rec yards5 Rec TD13.8 Yards/rec

Returns

17 Kick returns392 KR yards0 KR TD5 Punt returns105 PR yards1 PR TD

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs WR peers

Efficiency100
Volume23
Explosiveness45
Consistency87
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 consistency87th %ile · above avg

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.
▸11 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
▸Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
▸Peak game: 1.98 EPA/play in Wk 5 vs Utah (SP+ 9).

NIL Market Tier· 2023

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.

Player	Team	Yr	Plays	WEPA/play	Line val	Total EPA
Quadree Henderson	Pittsburgh	2016	63	0.530	1.6	33.4

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost

Wk	Opponent	Result	Opp SP+	Rec	Rec Yds	Avg	Rec TD	Long	EPA/play
1	@San José State	W42-17	-3.4	6	53	8.8	0	18	0.57
2	vsUC Davis	W55-7	—	4	65	16.3	1	32	1.06
3	vsSan Diego State	W26-9	-10.3	3	41	13.7	0	31	0.90
4	@Washington State	L35-38	4.9	5	76	15.2	0	50	0.97
5	vsUtah	W21-7	8.5	6	100	16.7	1	40	1.98
6	@California	W52-40	-0.1	3	34	11.3	1	18	0.58
7	vsUCLA	W36-24	9.7	5	87	17.4	1	43	1.36
9	@Arizona	L24-27	14.1	5	66	13.2	0	32	1.11
10	@Colorado	W26-19	-4.9	3	40	13.3	0	18	0.23
11	vsStanford	W62-17	-11.9	2	36	18.0	0	18	1.33
12	vsWashington	L20-22	16.4	5	64	12.8	0	22	0.92
13	@Oregon	L7-31	26.2	4	56	14.0	1	26	1.65
20	vsNotre Dame	L8-40	20.1	3	28	9.3	0	12	—

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

8.2%

Passing plays

14.8%

Rushing plays

2.1%

Standard downs

8.2%

Passing downs

8.2%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.80
Passing downs: 1.37
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.97 / 1.01

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