Skip to content
Malik Sherrod

#23Malik Sherrod

RB·Fresno State·20232.2 pts line valueDay 3 (Rds 4–7)

Malik Sherrod is a Featured Back for Fresno State. Malik's 2023 season ranks in the 20th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 202 plays — a developing rate for the RB.

What projects, and what doesn't · RBs · 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)0.52
    Beats guessing the RB average by 18%. n=4,219 RB seasons
  • EPA per play (efficiency)0.10
    Not projectable — we do not forecast this. n=3,575 RB seasons
  • Total EPA (value)0.41
    Beats guessing the RB average by 9%. n=3,575 RB seasons

Across all positions, usage carries year to year at 0.47 and efficiency at 0.07. So Malik Sherrod'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

Rushing
967 Rush yards9 Rush TD172 Carries5.6 Yards/carry
Receiving
43 Receptions262 Rec yards1 Rec TD6.1 Yards/rec
Returns
8 Kick returns236 KR yards1 KR TD

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs RB peers

  • Efficiency20
  • Volume77
  • Explosiveness52
  • Consistency71
  • Receiving61
Player type
Featured Back

The centerpiece of the run game — high carry volume, used in early downs and goal-line, true workhorse role.

Primary ball carrierHigh volumeGoal-line threat
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)20th %ile · below avg
Game-to-game consistency71th %ile · average
Key findings
  • Below-average efficiency vs RB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
  • High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Production faded as the season progressed — 0.09 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 0.47 EPA/play in Wk 5 vs Nevada (SP+ -22).

NIL Market Tier· 2023

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 · RB · 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
Saquon BarkleyPenn State0.3403.997.9
Dalvin CookFlorida State0.3404.399.3
James FlandersTulsa0.3904.9103.7
Breece HallIowa State0.3404.5102.3
Hassan HaskinsMichigan0.3804.8106.4

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+0.4700.47Wk 1 vs Purdue: -0.10 EPA/play1Wk 3 vs Arizona State: +0.19 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Kent State: +0.33 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Nevada: +0.47 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Wyoming: +0.27 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Utah State: +0.23 EPA/play7Wk 9 vs UNLV: +0.03 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs Boise State: +0.24 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs San José State: -0.07 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs New Mexico: +0.05 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs San Diego State: +0.46 EPA/play13
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+CarRush YdsAvgRush TDRecRec YdsRec TDEPA/play
1@PurdueW39-35-7.38172.11120-0.10
3@Arizona StateW29-0-11.36427.001-400.19
4vsKent StateW53-10-26.310717.103900.33
5vsNevadaW27-9-22.01212310.3131800.47
6@WyomingL19-24-3.611484.4021700.27
7@Utah StateW37-32-10.9241315.5333500.23
9vsUNLVW31-241.417563.3082810.03
10vsBoise StateW37-305.9211326.3142800.24
11@San José StateL18-42-3.415684.50410-0.07
12vsNew MexicoL17-25-16.513513.911300.05
13@San Diego StateL18-33-10.3151389.2254400.46
20vsNew Mexico StateW37-10-1.820904.508810

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
26.8%
Passing plays
9.0%
Rushing plays
55.9%
Standard downs
31.8%
Passing downs
15.9%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.13
Passing downs
0.59
Pass / Rush EPA
0.26 / 0.19

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+0.520−0.15
EPA per play · 2023 · 12 games

Chart shows per-game EPA (bars) and rolling 5-game average (line). Season breaks marked with dashed lines. Line value = est. points over replacement per game.

EPA = expected points added (opponent-adjusted). NIL estimates are model-based ranges, not reported deals. Data: CollegeFootballData. Not betting advice.