Skip to content
Ashtyn Hawkins

#6Ashtyn Hawkins

Ashtyn Hawkins is a Slot Specialist WR for Texas State. Ashtyn's 2023 season ranks in the 100th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 72 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 Ashtyn Hawkins'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
55 Receptions874 Rec yards3 Rec TD15.9 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume23
  • Explosiveness59
  • Consistency80
  • Pass-Down70
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 consistency80th %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.
  • 9 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 0.28 from the first to second half of the season.
  • Peak game: 1.79 EPA/play in Wk 1 vs Baylor (SP+ -8).

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.

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

+1.7901.79Wk 1 vs Baylor: +1.79 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs UTSA: +0.76 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Jackson State: +1.15 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Nevada: -0.05 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Southern Miss: +1.07 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Louisiana: +0.35 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs UL Monroe: -0.14 EPA/play7Wk 9 vs Troy: +1.19 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs Georgia Southern: +0.85 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Coastal Carolina: +0.66 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Arkansas State: +1.67 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs South Alabama: +1.25 EPA/play13
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1@BaylorW42-31-8.355811.60311.79
2@UTSAL13-205.434113.70280.76
3vsJackson StateW77-3433812.71271.15
4vsNevadaW35-24-22.06498.2012-0.05
5@Southern MissW50-36-14.4510120.20431.07
6@LouisianaL30-340.489311.60410.35
7vsUL MonroeW21-20-21.611515.0015-0.14
9vsTroyL13-319.845714.31281.19
10vsGeorgia SouthernW45-24-5.225427.00370.85
11@Coastal CarolinaL23-31-1.22178.50130.66
12@Arkansas StateL31-77-6.3816520.60451.67
13vsSouth AlabamaW52-445.1513126.21481.25
20vsRiceW45-21-10.235518.3032

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
8.0%
Passing plays
16.5%
Rushing plays
0.4%
Standard downs
6.6%
Passing downs
10.9%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.73
Passing downs
0.85
Pass / Rush EPA
0.78 / 0.93

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.