#29Caden Durham

RB·LSU·2025

Caden Durham is a Committee Back for LSU. Caden's 2025 season ranks in the 0th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 128 plays — a developing rate for the RB.

What projects, and what doesn't · RBs · 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)0.52
Beats guessing the RB average by 18%. n=4,219 RB seasons
EPA per play (efficiency)0.10
Not projectable — we do not forecast this. n=3,575 RB seasons
Total EPA (value)0.41
Beats guessing the RB average by 9%. n=3,575 RB seasons

Across all positions, usage carries year to year at 0.47 and efficiency at 0.07. So Caden Durham'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

Rushing

505 Rush yards3 Rush TD111 Carries4.5 Yards/carry

Receiving

16 Receptions91 Rec yards0 Rec TD5.7 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs RB peers

Efficiency0
Volume48
Explosiveness30
Consistency0
Receiving48

Player type

Committee Back

Part of a rotation — contributes in a complementary role and keeps the featured back fresh.

Rotational roleSituational use

Peer percentiles

Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)0th %ile · below avg

Game-to-game consistency0th %ile · below avg

Key findings

▸Below-average efficiency vs RB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
▸High game-to-game variance — boom-or-bust profile.
▸Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
▸Production faded as the season progressed — 0.19 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
▸Peak game: 0.36 EPA/play in Wk 12 vs Arkansas (SP+ 5).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

On3 valuation ↗

Starter

Meaningful starter. Local collective + position-group 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.

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

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

Wk	Opponent	Result	Opp SP+	Car	Rush Yds	Avg	Rush TD	Rec	Rec Yds	Rec TD	EPA/play
1	@Clemson	W17-10	9.5	17	74	4.4	1	3	22	0	0.12
2	vsLouisiana Tech	W23-7	-1.3	13	29	2.2	1	2	10	0	0.12
3	vsFlorida	W20-10	3.5	15	93	6.2	0	—	—	—	-0.01
4	vsSE Louisiana	W56-10	—	7	17	2.4	0	3	7	0	0.12
7	vsSouth Carolina	W20-10	5.9	15	70	4.7	0	1	17	0	0.31
8	@Vanderbilt	L24-31	20.3	7	59	8.4	0	1	2	0	0.19
9	vsTexas A&M	L25-49	20.7	5	36	7.2	0	—	—	—	0.13
11	@Alabama	L9-20	14.8	3	4	1.3	0	2	-2	0	-0.49
12	vsArkansas	W23-22	5.1	12	65	5.4	1	3	34	0	0.36
13	vsWestern Kentucky	W13-10	1.6	6	16	2.7	0	—	—	—	-0.38
14	@Oklahoma	L13-17	18.3	6	42	7.0	0	1	1	0	0.16
20	vsHouston	L35-38	7.4	5	0	0.0	0	—	—	—	—

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

16.8%

Passing plays

4.4%

Rushing plays

33.6%

Standard downs

19.8%

Passing downs

11.3%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.02
Passing downs: 0.28
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.34 / 0.04

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