Skip to content
Kaelan Chudzinski
Kaelan Chudzinski

#85Kaelan Chudzinski

Kaelan Chudzinski is a Versatile TE for Boston College. Kaelan's 2025 season produced 17.8 total EPA across 32 plays.

What projects, and what doesn't · TEs · 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)0.42
    Beats guessing the TE average by 9%. n=2,225 TE seasons
  • EPA per play (efficiency)0.04
    Not projectable — we do not forecast this. n=2,016 TE seasons
  • Total EPA (value)0.46
    Beats guessing the TE average by 13%. n=2,016 TE seasons

Across all positions, usage carries year to year at 0.47 and efficiency at 0.07. So Kaelan Chudzinski'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
24 Receptions313 Rec yards4 Rec TD13.0 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs TE peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume15
  • Explosiveness40
  • Consistency62
  • Pass-Down69
Player type
Versatile TE

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 consistency62th %ile · average
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among TEs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • 6 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.45 from the first to second half of the season.
  • Peak game: 3.50 EPA/play in Wk 14 vs Syracuse (SP+ -13).

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 · TE · 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
Ty ThompsonTulane0.4200.720.2
Seth GreenMinnesota0.3900.032.4
Johnny LanganRutgers0.3000.017.7
Evan SvobodaWyoming0.2900.521.8
Jordan MyersRice0.2700.215.9

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+3.5003.50Wk 1 vs Fordham: +1.42 EPA/play1Wk 3 vs Stanford: -0.25 EPA/play3Wk 5 vs California: +0.30 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Pittsburgh: +1.75 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Clemson: -0.27 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs UConn: +1.20 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Louisville: +0.99 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs Notre Dame: +0.73 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs SMU: -0.23 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Georgia Tech: +0.18 EPA/play12Wk 14 vs Syracuse: +3.50 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1vsFordhamW66-10155.0051.42
3@StanfordL20-30-11.811111.0011-0.25
5vsCaliforniaL24-28-3.22126.0090.30
6@PittsburghL7-488.437023.31451.75
7vsClemsonL10-419.53299.7020-0.27
8vsUConnL23-385.1199.0191.20
9@LouisvilleL24-3812.448020.01300.99
10vsNotre DameL10-2524.412121.00210.73
11vsSMUL13-4513.43103.304-0.23
12vsGeorgia TechL34-369.34256.31110.18
14@SyracuseW34-12-13.114141.00413.50

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
5.3%
Passing plays
9.3%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
4.6%
Passing downs
7.0%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.51
Passing downs
0.62
Pass / Rush EPA
0.56 / —

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.