#4Nathan Peterman

QB·Pittsburgh·201613.1 pts line valueDay 2 (Rds 2–3)

Nathan Peterman is a Dual-Threat QB for Pittsburgh. Nathan's 2016 season ranks in the 93th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 372 plays — a elite rate for the QB.

What projects, and what doesn't · QBs · 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)0.46
Beats guessing the QB average by 16%. n=2,421 QB seasons
EPA per play (efficiency)0.05
Not projectable — we do not forecast this. n=1,965 QB seasons
Total EPA (value)0.51
Beats guessing the QB average by 20%. n=1,965 QB seasons

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

2016 Production

Passing

185/306 Comp/Att2855 Pass yards27 Pass TD7 INT60.5% Comp %

Rushing

286 Rush yards3 Rush TD72 Carries4.0 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2016 · vs QB peers

Efficiency93
Volume100
Dual-Threat98
Consistency87
Clutch39

Player type

Dual-Threat QB

A genuine rushing threat who stresses defenses horizontally. Extends plays with legs and forces extra gap assignments.

Rushing threatScrambles for valueStresses defensive structure

Peer percentiles

Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)93th %ile · elite

Game-to-game consistency87th %ile · above avg

Key findings

▸Top-10% efficiency among QBs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
▸High-volume role — one of the team's most-used QBs by play share.
▸High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
▸8 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
▸Peak game: 1.14 EPA/play in Wk 13 vs Syracuse (SP+ -3).

Historical Comparables · QB · efficiency + volume + value

Players from 2013–2025 matched on EPA efficiency, play volume, and adjusted value tier — not just one metric.

Player	Team	Yr	Plays	WEPA/play	Line val	Total EPA
Kaidon Salter	Liberty	2023	486	0.711	14.7	345.6
Blake Sims	Alabama	2014	473	0.696	15.4	329.4
Stetson Bennett	Georgia	2022	509	0.635	12.5	323.0
Malik Cunningham	Louisville	2021	502	0.681	14.7	341.6
Tanner Mordecai	SMU	2021	510	0.630	14.0	321.5

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost

Wk	Opponent	Result	Opp SP+	C/ATT	Pass Yds	Pass TD	INT	QBR	Rush Yds	Rush TD	EPA/play
1	vsVillanova	W28-7	—	19/32	175	2	0	53.6	-8	0	0.31
2	vsPenn State	W42-39	19.0	11/15	91	3	1	78.4	52	0	0.56
3	@Oklahoma State	L38-45	16.4	14/29	237	1	1	39.4	33	0	0.23
4	@North Carolina	L36-37	15.9	14/18	140	0	0	89.6	19	1	0.61
5	vsMarshall	W43-27	-12.7	17/23	280	2	0	93.4	18	0	0.74
6	vsGeorgia Tech	W37-34	7.8	14/20	192	1	0	73.6	-7	0	0.60
7	@Virginia	W45-31	-3.8	11/21	137	2	0	80.3	26	0	0.49
9	vsVirginia Tech	L36-39	15.2	13/22	267	1	1	51.8	33	0	0.65
10	@Miami	L28-51	18.6	17/35	287	2	1	46.8	25	0	0.24
11	@Clemson	W43-42	28.7	22/37	308	5	0	76.2	18	0	0.47
12	vsDuke	W56-14	-2.8	11/18	237	3	1	83.3	3	0	0.40
13	vsSyracuse	W76-61	-2.7	9/18	251	4	1	98.3	79	1	1.14
1	vsNorthwestern	L24-31	2.9	13/18	253	1	1	90.0	-5	1	0.37

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

43.2%

Passing plays

94.9%

Rushing plays

11.6%

Standard downs

34.9%

Passing downs

62.0%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.49
Passing downs: 0.48
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.51 / 0.39

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg

EPA per play · 2016 · 13 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.