Player Stats

Danzel McKinley-Lewis 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

Receiving yards
1,518
Receptions
102
Touchdowns
8

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesRecRec YdsTDOverall
2016 Regular SeasonToledo6770026.4
2017 PostseasonToledo1318046.5
2017 Regular SeasonToledo1322311346.5
2018 Regular SeasonToledo314014.9
2019 Regular SeasonToledo1236615178.9
2020 Regular SeasonToledo619280251
2021 PostseasonToledo1026044.2
2021 Regular SeasonToledo1014224244.2

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2019 Regular Season

Toledo paired 615 primary output with 81 efficiency.

Supporting note

2021 Postseason role shape

target-driven usage with 73.1 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value stayed steady

2021 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: Bowling Green

Win with an explosive receiving profile. 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.

2021 Postseason · Toledo

Games

10

Receiving Yards / G

23

Efficiency

73.1

Usage

11

Consistency

29.6

Best Game by takeover score

Bowling Green

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.

12345678910

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Middle Tennessee: 6. Norfolk State: 11. Colorado State: 44. Ball State: 13. Massachusetts: 15. Northern Illinois: 14. Western Michigan: 34. Eastern Michigan: 10. Bowling Green: 83. Ohio: 0

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. Middle Tennessee: 2 by 20. Norfolk State: 2 by 36.7. Colorado State: 3 by 97.8. Ball State: 2 by 43.3. Massachusetts: 1 by 100. Northern Illinois: 1 by 93.3. Western Michigan: 1 by 100. Eastern Michigan: 1 by 66.7. Bowling Green: 3 by 100

Split Comparison

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

Wins26 · Games = 6 · +7.5 vs Losses
Losses18.5 · Games = 4 · -7.5 vs Wins