Skip to content
K.D. Hutchinson

#2K.D. Hutchinson

K.D. Hutchinson is a Versatile WR for Western Kentucky. K.D.'s 2025 season ranks in the 100th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 88 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 K.D. Hutchinson'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
88 Rush yards2 Rush TD13 Carries6.8 Yards/carry
Receiving
66 Receptions618 Rec yards3 Rec TD9.4 Yards/rec
Returns
2 Punt returns-2 PR yards0 PR TD

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume29
  • Explosiveness16
  • Consistency75
  • 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 consistency75th %ile · above avg
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among WRs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
  • 7 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 — 0.62 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 1.98 EPA/play in Wk 1 vs North Alabama.

NIL Market Tier· 2025

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
Keytaon ThompsonMississippi State0.4601.232.2
Savion WilliamsTCU0.4501.125.2
DeAndre HughesAir Force0.4701.328.2
Quadree HendersonPittsburgh0.5301.633.4
Javion PoseyFlorida Atlantic0.4501.423.8

Comps are statistical — efficiency, volume, and value tier all factor in. Style and conference context differ.

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+1.9801.98Wk 1 vs North Alabama: +1.98 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Toledo: +1.06 EPA/play2Wk 4 vs Nevada: +0.53 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Missouri State: +0.81 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Delaware: +0.77 EPA/play6Wk 8 vs Florida International: -0.09 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Louisiana Tech: +0.76 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs New Mexico State: +0.68 EPA/play10Wk 12 vs Middle Tennessee: +0.33 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs LSU: +0.06 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Jacksonville State: +0.22 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
0vsSam HoustonW41-24-27.84348.5112
1vsNorth AlabamaW55-6511322.62781.98
2@ToledoL21-456.033712.30231.06
4vsNevadaW31-16-13.42189.00130.53
5@Missouri StateW27-22-10.734414.70170.81
6@DelawareW27-24-10.99586.40150.77
8vsFlorida InternationalL6-25-10.54266.5019-0.09
9@Louisiana TechW28-27-1.367712.80210.76
10vsNew Mexico StateW35-16-15.578311.90380.68
12vsMiddle TennesseeW42-26-16.055210.40340.33
13@LSUL10-1310.38405.0090.06
14@Jacksonville StateL34-37-6.75377.40110.22
20vsSouthern MissW27-16-7.15-1-0.206

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
10.0%
Passing plays
15.3%
Rushing plays
3.5%
Standard downs
10.0%
Passing downs
10.1%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.36
Passing downs
0.80
Pass / Rush EPA
0.53 / 0.35

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.