Player Stats

Lorenzo Dantzler 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
90
TFL
23
Sacks
11
QB hurries
20
Passes defended
3
Touchdowns
1

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesTacklesTFLSacksQB HurPDTDOverall
2016 Regular SeasonSouthern Miss00-0--0-
2017 Regular SeasonUTSA00-0--0-
2018 Regular SeasonUTSA10278.53.52-156.1
2019 Regular SeasonUTSA12226.54.551053.4
2020 PostseasonUTSA102-011061
2020 Regular SeasonUTSA1030616-061
2021 Regular SeasonUTSA892261040.4

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2020 Postseason

UTSA paired 15 primary output with 28.3 efficiency.

Supporting note

2021 Regular Season role shape

impact-led usage with 18.4 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value cooled off

2021 Regular Season fell back from the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Multi-stop career journey

Production spans 2 team stops, with role shifts visible across Southern Miss, UTSA.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: UAB

Win with 3 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.

2021 Regular Season · UTSA

Games

8

Havoc Plays / G

1.4

Efficiency

18.4

Usage

4.8

Consistency

38.1

Best Game by takeover score

UAB

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.

12345678

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. Illinois: 1. Middle Tennessee: 3. Memphis: 1. UNLV: 3. Louisiana Tech: 0. UTEP: 0. Southern Miss: 0. UAB: 3

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. Illinois: 0 by 10. Middle Tennessee: 0 by 30. Memphis: 1 by 14.2. UNLV: 1 by 34.2. Louisiana Tech: 2 by 8.3. UTEP: 2 by 8.3. Southern Miss: 1 by 4.2. UAB: 2 by 38.3

Split Comparison

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

First Half2 · Games = 4 · +1.3 vs Second Half
Second Half0.8 · Games = 4 · -1.3 vs First Half