#2Shea Patterson

QB·Michigan·2019 20186.2 pts line valueDay 3 (Rds 4–7)

Shea Patterson is a 2-year Volume Passer for Michigan. Shea's 2019 season ranks in the 20th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 430 plays — a developing 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 Shea Patterson'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.

2019 Production

Passing

214/381 Comp/Att3061 Pass yards23 Pass TD8 INT56.2% Comp %

Rushing

50 Rush yards5 Rush TD87 Carries0.6 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2019 · vs QB peers

Efficiency20
Volume100
Dual-Threat41
Consistency73
Clutch50

Player type

Volume Passer

High-rep offense that leans on this QB's arm — value comes through cumulative production across a high number of plays.

High play countFranchise-volume role

Peer percentiles

Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)20th %ile · below avg

Game-to-game consistency73th %ile · average

Key findings

▸Below-average efficiency vs QB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
▸High-volume role — one of the team's most-used QBs by play share.
▸High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
▸4 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
▸Production faded as the season progressed — 0.08 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
▸Peak game: 0.79 EPA/play in Wk 5 vs Rutgers (SP+ -15).

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	vsMiddle Tennessee	W40-21	-11.3	17/29	203	3	0	53.3	28	0	0.14
2	vsArmy	W24-21	-2.1	19/29	207	0	0	59.6	-18	0	0.07
4	@Wisconsin	L14-35	20.3	14/32	219	2	1	36.4	-1	0	0.28
5	vsRutgers	W52-0	-14.6	17/23	276	1	1	95.4	4	3	0.79
6	vsIowa	W10-3	16.7	14/26	147	0	1	27.4	25	0	0.09
7	@Illinois	W42-25	0.6	11/22	194	3	0	85.5	17	1	0.58
8	@Penn State	L21-28	24.3	24/41	276	0	1	54.6	34	1	0.19
9	vsNotre Dame	W45-14	17.7	6/12	100	2	0	43.4	2	0	0.11
10	@Maryland	W38-7	-6.3	13/22	151	1	0	—	5	0	0.16
12	vsMichigan State	W44-10	7.2	24/33	384	4	0	—	-15	0	0.53
13	@Indiana	W39-14	12.8	20/32	366	5	1	—	-15	0	0.64
14	vsOhio State	L27-56	35.4	18/43	305	1	1	—	-20	0	0.02
1	vsAlabama	L16-35	32.4	17/37	233	1	2	—	4	0	0.00

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

51.0%

Passing plays

93.3%

Rushing plays

13.6%

Standard downs

44.8%

Passing downs

65.9%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.23
Passing downs: 0.28
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.27 / 0.10

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 · 2018 — 2019 · 26 games

Season	Team	Line value	WEPA/play	YoY Δ	Total EPA
2018	Michigan	8.5	0.541	—	218.4
2019	Michigan	6.2	0.431	-0.11	217.0

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.