Skip to content
Darius Lassiter

#5Darius Lassiter

WR·BYU·2024

Darius Lassiter is a Versatile WR for BYU. Darius's 2024 season ranks in the 100th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 65 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 Darius Lassiter'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.

2024 Production

Receiving
45 Receptions703 Rec yards4 Rec TD15.6 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2024 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume27
  • Explosiveness57
  • Consistency81
  • 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 consistency81th %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.
  • 8 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Production faded as the season progressed — 0.55 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 1.56 EPA/play in Wk 9 vs UCF (SP+ 3).

NIL Market Tier· 2024

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

+1.5601.56Wk 2 vs SMU: +1.20 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Wyoming: +1.04 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Kansas State: +0.41 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Baylor: +1.49 EPA/play5Wk 7 vs Arizona: +1.29 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Oklahoma State: +1.29 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs UCF: +1.56 EPA/play9Wk 11 vs Utah: -0.01 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Kansas: -0.08 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Arizona State: +0.67 EPA/play13
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
2@SMUW18-1517.526231.00571.20
3@WyomingW34-14-13.63279.01201.04
4vsKansas StateW38-914.13268.71130.41
5@BaylorW34-288.4812015.01441.49
7vsArizonaW41-19-2.858617.20381.29
8vsOklahoma StateW38-35-2.6612921.51501.29
9@UCFW37-242.845413.50201.56
11@UtahW22-217.744611.5027-0.01
12vsKansasL13-174.93268.7013-0.08
13@Arizona StateL23-289.4510320.60360.67
20vsColoradoW36-148.122412.0014

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
9.3%
Passing plays
18.9%
Rushing plays
0.3%
Standard downs
8.5%
Passing downs
10.9%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.63
Passing downs
1.08
Pass / Rush EPA
0.83 / -0.72

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.