#1Julian Gray

WR·NC State·2023

Julian Gray is a Versatile WR for NC 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 Julian Gray'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

16 Receptions170 Rec yards1 Rec TD10.6 Yards/rec

Returns

17 Kick returns442 KR yards1 KR TD1 Punt returns5 PR yards0 PR TD

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs WR peers

Efficiency100
Volume10
Explosiveness24
Consistency1
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 consistency1th %ile · below 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 variance — boom-or-bust profile.
▸4 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 0.38 from the first to second half of the season.
▸Peak game: 3.05 EPA/play in Wk 11 vs Wake Forest (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.

Player	Team	Yr	Plays	WEPA/play	Line val	Total EPA
Dane Kinamon	Air Force	2021	39	0.410	0.7	16.0
Savion Williams	TCU	2024	56	0.450	1.1	25.2
Keytaon Thompson	Virginia	2021	41	0.370	0.6	15.2
Micah Davis	Air Force	2021	44	0.370	0.6	16.3
JoJo Natson	Utah State	2014	51	0.390	1.0	19.9

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
1	@UConn	W24-14	-15.6	2	14	7.0	0	9	0.74
2	vsNotre Dame	L24-45	20.1	2	15	7.5	0	8	-0.21
3	vsVMI	W45-7	—	2	80	40.0	0	64	2.42
4	@Virginia	W24-21	-10.8	1	7	7.0	0	7	-0.39
5	vsLouisville	L10-13	8.0	—	—	—	—	—	-1.16
6	vsMarshall	W48-41	-9.0	3	7	2.3	0	6	-0.17
7	@Duke	L3-24	9.4	2	13	6.5	0	8	0.48
9	vsClemson	W24-17	10.5	1	5	5.0	0	5	-0.33
10	vsMiami	W20-6	9.6	1	2	2.0	0	2	-0.55
11	@Wake Forest	W26-6	-7.9	1	20	20.0	1	20	3.05
20	vsKansas State	L19-28	16.2	1	7	7.0	0	7	—

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

3.4%

Passing plays

6.4%

Rushing plays

0.8%

Standard downs

3.1%

Passing downs

4.1%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: -0.10
Passing downs: 1.19
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.58 / -0.32

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