Skip to content
Kisean Johnson

#13Kisean Johnson

Kisean Johnson is a Versatile WR for Western Kentucky. Kisean's 2024 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 Kisean Johnson'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
75 Receptions925 Rec yards7 Rec TD12.3 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2024 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume29
  • Explosiveness36
  • Consistency72
  • 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 consistency72th %ile · average
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among WRs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
  • 9 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 0.42 from the first to second half of the season.
  • Peak game: 3.50 EPA/play in Wk 15 vs Jacksonville State (SP+ -1).

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

+3.5003.50Wk 1 vs Alabama: -0.14 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Eastern Kentucky: +1.43 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Middle Tennessee: +1.25 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Toledo: +0.46 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Boston College: +0.99 EPA/play5Wk 7 vs UTEP: +1.34 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Sam Houston: +0.24 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs Kennesaw State: +0.66 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs New Mexico State: +1.73 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Louisiana Tech: +0.36 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Liberty: +1.07 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Jacksonville State: +0.01 EPA/play14Wk 15 vs Jacksonville State: +3.50 EPA/play15
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1@AlabamaL0-6325.02157.5013-0.14
2vsEastern KentuckyW31-0611919.80421.43
3@Middle TennesseeW49-21-24.4812916.12361.25
4vsToledoW26-21-2.567312.21440.46
5@Boston CollegeL20-211.27568.01160.99
7vsUTEPW44-17-22.758216.40201.34
8@Sam HoustonW31-14-6.93196.30100.24
10vsKennesaw StateW31-14-25.146416.00440.66
11@New Mexico StateW41-28-19.058817.61511.73
12vsLouisiana TechL7-12-11.644010.00190.36
13@LibertyL21-380.279413.41321.07
14vsJacksonville StateW19-17-1.08516.40140.01
15@Jacksonville StateL12-52-1.012525.01253.50
20vsJames MadisonL17-277.59707.8036

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
10.1%
Passing plays
17.9%
Rushing plays
1.0%
Standard downs
9.9%
Passing downs
10.5%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.59
Passing downs
0.89
Pass / Rush EPA
0.75 / -0.42

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.