#16Jaren Hamilton

WR·Arizona State·2025

Jaren Hamilton is a Vertical Threat WR for Arizona 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 Jaren Hamilton'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

7 Receptions169 Rec yards0 Rec TD24.1 Yards/rec

Returns

11 Kick returns215 KR yards0 KR TD

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

Efficiency0
Volume10
Explosiveness100
Consistency0
Pass-Down100

Player type

Vertical Threat WR

Elite deep receiver who stretches the field. Wins downfield, commands safety attention, and creates the threat that opens underneath routes.

Downfield threatYAC upsideCreates space for teammates

Peer percentiles

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

Game-to-game consistency0th %ile · below avg

Key findings

▸Below-average efficiency vs WR peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
▸Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
▸High game-to-game variance — boom-or-bust profile.
▸Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
▸Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.14 from the first to second half of the season.
▸Peak game: 2.19 EPA/play in Wk 5 vs TCU (SP+ 8).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

On3 valuation ↗

Contributor

Rotational contributor. Smaller collective or local 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
De'Michael Harris	Southern Miss	2019	117	0.130	0.7	15.2
Hyleck Foster	Marshall	2015	101	0.180	0.5	18.2
Amare Jones	Tulane	2020	71	0.180	0.0	12.8
Shai Werts	Georgia Southern	2017	161	0.150	0.0	24.2
Davis Bryson	Kennesaw State	2024	97	0.200	0.0	19.4

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
2	@Mississippi State	L20-24	4.1	—	—	—	—	—	—
3	vsTexas State	W34-15	2.3	—	—	—	—	—	-0.46
4	@Baylor	W27-24	1.4	—	—	—	—	—	-0.82
5	vsTCU	W27-24	8.3	1	44	44.0	0	44	2.19
7	@Utah	L10-42	22.2	—	—	—	—	—	-0.70
8	vsTexas Tech	W26-22	27.6	3	101	33.7	0	49	0.64
9	vsHouston	L16-24	7.4	2	19	9.5	0	12	-0.26
10	@Iowa State	W24-19	9.9	—	—	—	—	—	—
12	vsWest Virginia	W25-23	-6.8	—	—	—	—	—	—
20	vsDuke	L39-42	6.6	1	5	5.0	0	5	—

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

3.5%

Passing plays

6.2%

Rushing plays

0.7%

Standard downs

3.9%

Passing downs

2.6%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: -0.15
Passing downs: 0.52
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.11 / -0.84

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