Skip to content
Naiem Simmons

#9Naiem Simmons

Naiem Simmons is a Slot Specialist WR for South Florida. Naiem's 2023 season produced 39.1 total EPA across 45 plays.

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 Naiem Simmons'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
39 Receptions637 Rec yards5 Rec TD16.3 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume15
  • Explosiveness62
  • Consistency65
  • Pass-Down100
Player type
Slot Specialist WR

The offense's primary passing-down weapon — routes, separation, and reliability on 3rd down define this role.

3rd-down converterRoute technicianHigh passing-down share
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)100th %ile · elite
Game-to-game consistency65th %ile · average
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among WRs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • 8 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 0.51 from the first to second half of the season.
  • Peak game: 3.21 EPA/play in Wk 10 vs Memphis (SP+ 4).

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.

PlayerTeamWEPA/playLine valTotal EPA
Quadree HendersonPittsburgh0.5301.633.4
DeAndre HughesAir Force0.4701.328.2
Keytaon ThompsonMississippi State0.4601.232.2
Bert Emanuel Jr.Central Michigan0.4601.624.4
Savion WilliamsTCU0.4501.125.2

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+3.2103.21Wk 1 vs Western Kentucky: -0.60 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Florida A&M: +2.89 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Alabama: -0.22 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Rice: +2.58 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Navy: +0.48 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs UAB: -0.01 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Florida Atlantic: +0.79 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs UConn: -0.03 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs Memphis: +3.21 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Temple: +1.58 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs UTSA: +0.44 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Charlotte: +1.62 EPA/play13
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1@Western KentuckyL24-41-2.0166.006-0.60
2vsFlorida A&MW38-2435919.71312.89
3vsAlabamaL3-1723.13206.709-0.22
4vsRiceW42-29-10.2827234.01532.58
5@NavyW44-30-13.75234.6090.48
6@UABL35-56-14.722110.5113-0.01
7vsFlorida AtlanticL14-56-9.423718.50340.79
8@UConnW24-21-15.64194.808-0.03
10@MemphisL50-593.527336.51443.21
11vsTempleW27-23-21.011313.00131.58
12@UTSAL21-495.422110.50120.44
13vsCharlotteW48-14-21.42178.51161.62
20vsSyracuseW45-0-4.445614.0033

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
5.1%
Passing plays
10.9%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
4.0%
Passing downs
7.2%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.54
Passing downs
1.19
Pass / Rush EPA
0.87 / —

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.