Usage Score
7.6
Player Dossier
2016-2019Mississippi State
Leo Lewis
LB • 6'2" • 245 lbs • Brookhaven, MS, USA
Ball-hunting defenderSplash play profile
Leo Lewis shows a ball-hunting defender profile with 27.4 disruption score.
Efficiency
27.4
Consistency
38.3
Season Value
21.2
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2019 Postseason · Mississippi State
16161717181919
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 7
- Program Path
- Mississippi State
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: LSU
Scouting Read
Best season and peak-game context are pinned here so the rest of the page can stay analytical without losing the headline story.
Leo Lewis, LB. Best season Best season by value score: 2019 Postseason · Mississippi State. Leo Lewis shows a ball-hunting defender profile with 27.4 disruption score.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2019 Postseason
Mississippi State paired 8.5 primary output with 27.4 efficiency.
Supporting note
2019 Postseason role shape
impact-led usage with 27.4 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2019 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: LSU
Loss with 2.5 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 then drop into the full log without losing the story of the year.
Season Explorer
Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.
2019 Postseason · Mississippi State
Games
13
Havoc Plays / G
0.7
Efficiency
27.4
Usage
7.6
Consistency
38.3
Best Game by takeover score
Louisville
Hover a point or expand a game row to keep the active game context visible here.
Game-by-Game Trend
12345678910111213
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Louisville: 0. Louisiana: 0. Southern Miss: 0.5. Kansas State: 1.5. Kentucky: 0. Auburn: 1. Tennessee: 0. LSU: 2.5. Texas A&M: 0. Arkansas: 0.5. Alabama: 0.5. Unknown: 1. Ole Miss: 1
Volume vs Efficiency
Low volume / high quality
High volume / high quality
Low volume / lower quality
High volume / lower quality
Volume on the x-axis, quality on the y-axis.
Volume versus efficiency scatter chart. Louisville: 2 by 8.3. Louisiana: 6 by 25. Southern Miss: 5 by 25.8. Kansas State: 12 by 65. Kentucky: 3 by 12.5. Auburn: 8 by 43.3. Tennessee: 3 by 12.5. LSU: 7 by 54.2. Texas A&M: 4 by 16.7. Arkansas: 2 by 13.3. Alabama: 4 by 21.7. Unknown: 5 by 30.8. Ole Miss: 4 by 26.7
Split Comparison
Wins0.4 · n=5 · -0.4 vs Losses
Losses0.8 · n=7 · +0.4 vs Wins
First Half0.4 · n=7 · -0.5 vs Second Half
Second Half0.9 · n=6 · +0.5 vs First Half
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
13 games
Featured metric
Havoc Plays
Top game by takeover score
LSU
Best efficiency game
65 vs Kansas State
| Result | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mon 12/30 | @ Louisville | L 28-38 | 2 | 0 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Fri 11/29 | vs Ole Miss | W 21-20 | 4 | 2 | — | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sun 11/24 | vs Unknown | — | 5 | 0 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Sat 11/16 | vs Alabama | L 7-38 | 4 | 1 | — | 0.50 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 11/2 | @ Arkansas | W 54-24 | 2 | 0 | — | 0.50 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 10/26 | @ Texas A&M | L 30-49 | 4 | 0 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 10/19 | vs LSU | L 13-36 | 7 | 2 | — | 1.50 | 1 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 10/12 | @ Tennessee | L 10-20 | 3 | 2 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 9/28 | @ Auburn | L 23-56 | 8 | 7 | — | 1 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 9/21 | vs Kentucky | W 28-13 | 3 | 2 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 9/14 | vs Kansas State10+ tackles | L 24-31 | 12 | 1 | — | 0.50 | 0 | — | 1 | — | — |
| Sat 9/7 | vs Southern Miss | W 38-15 | 5 | 0 | — | 0.50 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
| Sat 8/31 | @ Louisiana | W 38-28 | 6 | 6 | — | 0 | 0 | — | 0 | — | — |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Mississippi State
2016-2019
Opening stop
Season Progression
2016201620172017201820192019
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 Postseason | Mississippi State | 7 | 30.7 | 6 | — |
| 2016 Regular Season | Mississippi State | 7 | 30.7 | 6 | 0 |
| 2017 Postseason | Mississippi State | 3 | 17 | 3.4 | -4 |
| 2017 Regular Season | Mississippi State | 3 | 17 | 3.4 | 0 |
| 2018 Regular Season | Mississippi State | 4 | 20.7 | 5 | 1 |
| 2019 Postseason | Mississippi State | 8.5 | 27.4 | 7.6 | 4.5 |
| 2019 Regular Season | Mississippi State | 8.5 | 27.4 | 7.6 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
LSU
Loss with 2.5 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
2.5
Primary metric
2.5 disruption/tackle impact with 57.7 takeover score.
#2
Ole Miss
2.5
Primary metric
Win with 2.5 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
2.5 disruption/tackle impact with 55.5 takeover score.
#3
South Alabama
2
Primary metric
Loss with 2 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
2 disruption/tackle impact with 50.3 takeover score.
#4
LSU
1
Primary metric
Win with 1 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
1 disruption/tackle impact with 49.6 takeover score.
#5
Kansas State
1.5
Primary metric
Loss with 1.5 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet.
1.5 disruption/tackle impact with 45.9 takeover score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2019 Postseason · Mississippi State
8.5 primary output · 27.4 efficiency · 7.6 usage
21.2
#2
2019 Regular Season · Mississippi State
21.2
8.5 primary · 27.4 efficiency · 7.6 usage
#3
2016 Postseason · Mississippi State
15.4
7 primary · 30.7 efficiency · 6 usage
Milestones
0
Impact games
1
Splash games
3
10+ tackle games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
4★
Class 2015 · Rating 0.9684
Brookhaven · Brookhaven, MS
- Committed To
- Mississippi State
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2015
Career Facts
1
Career teams
7
Seasons tracked
235
Career Tackles
Data Context
Coverage spans 7 tracked seasons, 50 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.