← Player leaders
Tanook Hines is a Slot Specialist WR for USC. Tanook's 2025 season produced 44.1 total EPA across 43 plays.
2026 Usage Outlook · projected share of team plays
6%
projected
band 3%'25 6%10%
Regressed toward the WR mean. Model correlation r≈0.47 on a 2019-2025 walk-forward — volume only; efficiency not projected.
2025 Production
Receiving
34 Receptions561 Rec yards2 Rec TD16.5 Yards/rec
Returns
3 Kick returns46 KR yards0 KR TD
Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers
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 consistency78th %ile · above avg
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.
- ▸10 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
- ▸Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
- ▸Peak game: 2.61 EPA/play in Wk 4 vs Michigan State (SP+ -3).
NIL Market Tier· 2025
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
EPA per play, by weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
| Wk | Opponent | Result | Opp SP+ | Rec | Rec Yds | Avg | Rec TD | Long | EPA/play |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | vsMissouri State | W73-13 | -10.7 | 1 | 11 | 11.0 | 0 | 11 | 1.15 |
| 2 | vsGeorgia Southern | W59-20 | -9.4 | 3 | 21 | 7.0 | 0 | 8 | 0.39 |
| 3 | @Purdue | W33-17 | -6.1 | 2 | 23 | 11.5 | 0 | 25 | 0.78 |
| 4 | vsMichigan State | W45-31 | -3.4 | 1 | 7 | 7.0 | 1 | 7 | 2.61 |
| 5 | @Illinois | L32-34 | 12.9 | 2 | 33 | 16.5 | 0 | 30 | 1.15 |
| 7 | vsMichigan | W31-13 | 12.4 | 1 | 8 | 8.0 | 0 | 8 | -0.09 |
| 8 | @Notre Dame | L24-34 | 24.4 | 5 | 67 | 13.4 | 0 | 24 | 0.80 |
| 10 | @Nebraska | W21-17 | 6.2 | 2 | 41 | 20.5 | 0 | 29 | 1.75 |
| 11 | vsNorthwestern | W38-17 | 5.8 | 1 | 10 | 10.0 | 0 | 10 | 1.28 |
| 12 | vsIowa | W26-21 | 19.7 | 1 | 5 | 5.0 | 0 | 5 | -0.27 |
| 13 | @Oregon | L27-42 | 25.9 | 6 | 141 | 23.5 | 1 | 51 | 1.65 |
| 14 | vsUCLA | W29-10 | -8.7 | 3 | 31 | 10.3 | 0 | 26 | 0.49 |
| 1 | vsTCU | L27-30 | 8.3 | 6 | 163 | 27.2 | 0 | 46 | 1.33 |
Usage & Situational · Pro
Snap-share proxy
Overall
5.5%
Passing plays
11.1%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
3.2%
Passing downs
11.5%
EPA by down type
- Standard downs
- 0.63
- Passing downs
- 1.34
- Pass / Rush EPA
- 1.02 / —
Usage = share of team plays (CFBD has no true snap counts).