Player breakdown
Mike Williams
Syracuse · 2010 Draft Class
6-4218 lbs4th round, 101st overallAge at Draft: 23Age: ~39
Elite1000+ NFL
Major awards: 0Heisman votes: 0NIL Contract Value: --
Watch HighlightsModel confidence
Success Probability
88%
Closest matches
NFL comparables
| Year | Team | G | GS | Tgt | Rec | Yds | Y/R | TD | Y/G |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2005 | DET | 14 | 4 | 57 | 29 | 350 | 12.1 | 1 | 25 |
| 2006 | DET | 8 | 2 | 18 | 8 | 99 | 12.4 | 1 | 12.4 |
| 2007 | 2TM | 8 | 1 | 23 | 7 | 90 | 12.9 | 0 | 11.3 |
| 2007 | OAK | 6 | 1 | 20 | 7 | 90 | 12.9 | 0 | 15 |
| 2007 | TEN | 2 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2010 | SEA | 14 | 13 | 110 | 65 | 751 | 11.6 | 2 | 53.6 |
| 2010 | TAM | 16 | 16 | 129 | 65 | 964 | 14.8 | 11 | 60.3 |
| 2011 | TAM | 16 | 15 | 124 | 65 | 771 | 11.9 | 3 | 48.2 |
| 2011 | SEA | 12 | 10 | 38 | 18 | 236 | 13.1 | 1 | 19.7 |
| 2012 | TAM | 16 | 16 | 126 | 63 | 996 | 15.8 | 9 | 62.3 |
| 2013 | TAM | 6 | 5 | 40 | 22 | 216 | 9.8 | 2 | 36 |
| 2014 | BUF | 9 | 0 | 19 | 8 | 142 | 17.8 | 1 | 15.8 |
| 2017 | LAC | 10 | 1 | 23 | 11 | 95 | 8.6 | 0 | 9.5 |
| 2018 | LAC | 16 | 5 | 66 | 43 | 664 | 15.4 | 10 | 41.5 |
| 2019 | LAC | 15 | 15 | 90 | 49 | 1,001 | 20.4 | 2 | 66.7 |
| 2020 | LAC | 15 | 11 | 85 | 48 | 756 | 15.8 | 5 | 50.4 |
| 2021 | LAC | 16 | 14 | 129 | 76 | 1,146 | 15.1 | 9 | 71.6 |
| 2022 | LAC | 13 | 13 | 93 | 63 | 895 | 14.2 | 4 | 68.8 |
| 2023 | LAC | 3 | 3 | 26 | 19 | 249 | 13.1 | 1 | 83 |
| 2024 | 2TM | 18 | 5 | 34 | 21 | 298 | 14.2 | 1 | 16.6 |
| 2024 | NYJ | 9 | 3 | 21 | 12 | 166 | 13.8 | 0 | 18.4 |
| 2024 | PIT | 9 | 2 | 13 | 9 | 132 | 14.7 | 1 | 14.7 |
| Career | 251 | 155 | 1287 | 708 | 10,107 | 14.3 | 64 | 40.3 | |
| Season | Team | Conf | G | Rec | Yds | TD | YPR | YPG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000 | Arizona State | Pac-10 | 11 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 6 | 0.5 |
| 2001 | Arizona State | Pac-10 | 11 | 10 | 89 | 0 | 8.9 | 8.1 |
| 2001 | Kentucky | SEC | 11 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 9 | 0.8 |
| 2002 | USC | Pac-10 | 13 | 81 | 1,265 | 14 | 15.6 | 97.3 |
| 2002 | Arizona State | Pac-10 | 14 | 15 | 67 | 1 | 4.5 | 4.8 |
| 2003 | USC | Pac-10 | 13 | 95 | 1,314 | 16 | 13.8 | 101.1 |
| 2006 | Syracuse | Big East | 10 | 24 | 461 | 4 | 19.2 | 46.1 |
| 2007 | Syracuse | Big East | 12 | 60 | 837 | 10 | 14 | 69.8 |
| 2009 | Syracuse | Big East | 7 | 49 | 746 | 6 | 15.2 | 106.6 |
| 2013 | Clemson | ACC | 10 | 20 | 316 | 3 | 15.8 | 31.6 |
| 2014 | Clemson | ACC | 13 | 57 | 1,030 | 6 | 18.1 | 79.2 |
| 2015 | Clemson | ACC | 1 | 2 | 20 | 1 | 10 | 20 |
| 2016 | Clemson | ACC | 15 | 98 | 1,361 | 11 | 13.9 | 90.7 |
| 2018 | Nebraska | Big Ten | 12 | 12 | 122 | 0 | 10.2 | 10.2 |
| 2019 | Nebraska | Big Ten | 12 | 5 | 109 | 0 | 21.8 | 9.1 |
| Career | 165 | 530 | 7,752 | 72 | 14.6 | 47.0 | ||
Model readout
Probability, context, and base score
XGBoost Prob
92%
ML model output
Context Prob
64%
Rule-based model
Suppression Signals
2
Depth chart context
SHAP Base
0.955
Average prediction
Top Positive Factors
Program WR pipeline: 17% NFL 1000-yard conversion rate+1.155
Physical production synergy+0.467
0.69 TDs/game — reliable scoring role in college+0.241
Top Negative Factors
Accounted for 1.33 yards per team pass attempt — featured receiver share-0.343
+13.5 ypg vs. draft class average — above average-0.287
Efficiency consistency: 1.25 — highly consistent across seasons-0.236