Skip to content
Quentin Skinner
Quentin Skinner

Quentin Skinner

WR·Kansas·2024

Quentin Skinner is a Vertical Threat WR for Kansas. Quentin's 2024 season produced 46.4 total EPA across 31 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 Quentin Skinner'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
25 Receptions557 Rec yards4 Rec TD22.3 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2024 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume16
  • Explosiveness100
  • Consistency74
  • Pass-Down100
Player type
Vertical Threat WR

Elite deep receiver who stretches the field. Wins downfield, commands safety attention, and creates the threat that opens underneath routes.

Downfield threatYAC upsideCreates space for teammates
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)100th %ile · elite
Game-to-game consistency74th %ile · average
Key findings
  • ▸Top-10% efficiency among WRs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • ▸Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • ▸High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
  • ▸7 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 1.76 from the first to second half of the season.
  • ▸Peak game: 2.82 EPA/play in Wk 12 vs BYU (SP+ 15).

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.

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+2.820−2.82Wk 1 vs Lindenwood: -1.22 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Illinois: +1.58 EPA/play2Wk 4 vs West Virginia: +1.21 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs TCU: +0.15 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Arizona State: +2.09 EPA/play6Wk 8 vs Houston: +2.80 EPA/play8Wk 11 vs Iowa State: +1.61 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs BYU: +2.82 EPA/play12Wk 14 vs Baylor: +1.52 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1vsLindenwoodW48-3—12525.0025-1.22
2@IllinoisL17-239.634214.00211.58
4@West VirginiaL28-322.122211.00141.21
5vsTCUL27-3810.82168.0090.15
6@Arizona StateL31-359.4613021.72342.09
8vsHoustonW42-14-8.225929.51482.80
11vsIowa StateW45-3610.3413533.81621.61
12@BYUW17-1315.325125.50292.82
14@BaylorL17-458.437725.70331.52

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
5.6%
Passing plays
12.3%
Rushing plays
0.9%
Standard downs
5.0%
Passing downs
7.0%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.95
Passing downs
2.49
Pass / Rush EPA
1.77 / -1.08

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.