#16Christian Fitzpatrick

WR·Oklahoma State·2025

Christian Fitzpatrick is a Versatile WR for Oklahoma State.

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 Christian Fitzpatrick'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

Receiving

8 Receptions90 Rec yards0 Rec TD11.3 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

Efficiency100
Volume12
Explosiveness28
Consistency85
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 consistency85th %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.
▸Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
▸Peak game: 0.56 EPA/play in Wk 2 vs Oregon (SP+ 26).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

On3 valuation ↗

Star

Top-10 nationally. Multiple mid-to-large collective deals expected.

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
Keytaon Thompson	Virginia	2020	39	0.320	0.4	12.5
Nick Nash	San José State	2021	45	0.310	0.5	14.0
Cade Harris	Air Force	2024	45	0.330	0.5	14.8
Ainias Smith	Texas A&M	2020	55	0.310	0.5	17.0
Keytaon Thompson	Virginia	2021	41	0.370	0.6	15.2

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	Long	EPA/play
1	vsUT Martin	W27-7	—	1	1	1.0	1	0.52
2	@Oregon	L3-69	25.9	2	34	17.0	35	0.56
4	vsTulsa	L12-19	-10.0	4	49	12.3	15	0.36
6	@Arizona	L13-41	12.0	1	6	6.0	6	0.08

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

4.1%

Passing plays

9.0%

Rushing plays

0.0%

Standard downs

3.7%

Passing downs

4.7%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: -0.22
Passing downs: 0.92
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.32 / —

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