Player Stats

George Lea College Stats

Career production, season-by-season totals, and the selected-season workbench are grouped here for stat-first searches.

Stat Footprint

Career production snapshot

Tackles
68
TFL
12.5
Sacks
4

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesTacklesTFLSacksQB HurPDTDOverall
2016 Regular SeasonArizona State61230.5--044.2
2017 Regular SeasonArizona State481.51--028
2018 PostseasonArizona State94-0--025.5
2018 Regular SeasonArizona State92030--025.5
2019 Regular SeasonArizona State92452.5--055.5

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2019 Regular Season

Arizona State paired 7.5 primary output with 19.5 efficiency.

Supporting note

2019 Regular Season role shape

impact-led usage with 19.5 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value is trending up

2019 Regular Season improved on the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: California

Win with 2 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet. It landed in the 100th percentile of the selected season.

Analysis workspace

Season Workbench

Filter the strongest season sample, inspect game-level shape, and compare the statistical profile without scrolling through the full player page.

Season Explorer

Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.

2019 Regular Season · Arizona State

Games

9

Havoc Plays / G

0.8

Efficiency

19.5

Usage

7.9

Consistency

36.9

Best Game by takeover score

California

Hover a point or expand a game row to keep the active game context visible here.

Active game

Hover over a point

Hover or select a game to keep its context visible here without the page shifting around.

Game-by-Game Trend

Follow how the selected stat changes from one game to the next. Spikes mark standout outings, while dips show quieter weeks.

123456789

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Kent State: 0. Sacramento State: 1. Michigan State: 0. Colorado: 0.5. California: 2. Washington State: 0.5. Utah: 0. UCLA: 2. USC: 1.5

Volume vs Efficiency

Each dot is a game. Farther right means the player carried more of the workload, and higher means they were more efficient with those chances.

Low volumeHigh quality

High volumeHigh quality

Low volumeLower quality

High volumeLower quality

Volume on the x-axis, quality on the y-axis.

Volume versus efficiency scatter chart. Kent State: 2 by 8.3. Sacramento State: 1 by 14.2. Michigan State: 2 by 8.3. Colorado: 3 by 17.5. California: 4 by 36.7. Washington State: 3 by 17.5. Utah: 4 by 16.7. UCLA: 1 by 24.2. USC: 4 by 31.7

Split Comparison

Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.

Wins0.7 · Games = 5 · -0.3 vs Losses
Losses1 · Games = 4 · +0.3 vs Wins