SSILVERMINECollege basketball stats
LIVE BOARD
2026–27 SEASON
2026–27 / Basketball scouting brief

The Citadel
vs Mercer

The projected game, the historical pressure points and the personnel questions to take into preparation. Generated from published statistics and reviewed announcements.

Jan 30, 2027 · start time unconfirmedMercer designated home · Hawkins Arena

The Citadel65.8Projected away score
Preseason baselineMercer by 13.7Projected winning margin · 67.1 possessions / 40 min

Mercer win estimate 84.0%

Mercer79.5Projected home score

Projected total 145.2. Nominal 80% range for home scoring margin: -2.2 to +29.6. Either team winning falls within that range.

The model uses historical opponent-adjusted efficiency and tempo. It has no current roster or injury inputs. Schedule details are partial and may change. Model edition: Sep 12, 2026.

Checking the latest registered D1 forecast for this game…

Pre-tip readiness / Four checks

Know what is settled before you scout.

Updated with this brief edition
Forecast signal
Model baseline

Home win estimate 84.0% · 31.9-point nominal range.

Model notebook
Schedule status
Start time unconfirmed

The source schedule has not confirmed a tip time; recheck before distributing a plan.

Source schedule
Roster evidence
Both teams observed

The Citadel 100% prior minutes represented · Mercer 100% prior minutes represented

Roster evidence
Market evidence
No licensed quote

No qualifying bookmaker observation is published; an edge cannot be reported.

Record a manual check

These checks describe source coverage and model state. They do not convert a roster listing into eligibility, a schedule into availability, or a market quote into a recommendation.

Reader tool / Manual quote check

Compare a line you observed.

Browser only · never published · checking model edition

Enter a home spread, game total or both sides of a moneyline from a source you are reviewing. Results use the current forecast when available and stay in this browser; they are not a verified market observation, recommendation or ledger record.

Up to 20 notes · never uploaded
Spread edge+13.7 ptsModel is more favorable to the home side.Normal approximation: 86.5% chance the home margin clears this line.
Total edge+145.2 ptsModel total is above the observed number.
Moneyline probability edgeEnter both moneylines to calculate a no-vig market probability.
Moneyline expected returnEnter both valid prices to compare home and away returns.

Convention: spread edge = model home margin + home spread; total edge = model total − observed total. This arithmetic does not account for vig, pushes, limits, timing or player availability. The spread-cover probability is a normal approximation from the published nominal 80% margin interval; it is not a calibrated betting probability. Moneyline edge uses both sides to remove two-way vig. Expected return is a hypothetical arithmetic output from the model probability and quoted price; it is not a recommendation or a realized result.

01 / Prior-season evidence → Film questions

Where the styles meet.

2025–26 observations

These are historical questions, not forecast adjustments. Each direction highlights up to two Four Factors with the largest difference in favorable percentile between one offense and the opposing defense. Rates came against different schedules and personnel; their difference is not an expected matchup outcome.

01 / Offensive concern / defensive strength

Keeping the game off the line

The Citadel offense Mercer defense

The Citadel · offense28.8%33 games · rank 330/366
Mercer · opponent rate28.3%32 games · rank 43/366

Free-throw attempts / FGA. Favorable percentile: 9.9 offense / 88.5 defense. Higher favorable percentile is better, including for statistics where a lower raw rate is better.

On film: Which actions draw shooting fouls, and which defenders can contain them without fouling? Check the personnel and foul context before assigning a coverage.

02 / A contrast to investigate

Shot-making

The Citadel offense Mercer defense

The Citadel · offense50.5%33 games · rank 248/366
Mercer · opponent rate50.2%32 games · rank 140/366

Effective FG%. Favorable percentile: 32.3 offense / 61.9 defense. Higher favorable percentile is better, including for statistics where a lower raw rate is better.

On film: Which actions create efficient shots, and which coverages take those looks away? Separate rim attempts, catch-and-shoot threes and contested pull-ups on film.

03 / A contrast to investigate

Shot-making

Mercer offense The Citadel defense

Mercer · offense53.3%32 games · rank 104/366
The Citadel · opponent rate56.6%33 games · rank 361/366

Effective FG%. Favorable percentile: 71.8 offense / 1.4 defense. Higher favorable percentile is better, including for statistics where a lower raw rate is better.

On film: Which actions create efficient shots, and which coverages take those looks away? Separate rim attempts, catch-and-shoot threes and contested pull-ups on film.

04 / Offensive strength / defensive concern

Protecting the possession

Mercer offense The Citadel defense

Mercer · offense14.7%32 games · rank 52/366
The Citadel · turnovers forced15.2%33 games · rank 296/366

Turnovers / possessions. Favorable percentile: 86.0 offense / 19.2 defense. Higher favorable percentile is better, including for statistics where a lower raw rate is better.

On film: Do the turnovers come from ball pressure, passing-lane help or unforced mistakes? Identify the ball handlers and distinguish live-ball losses from dead-ball turnovers.

02 / Both directions, all the evidence

The possession matchup.

The Citadel with the ball.

Historical rateThe CitadelOffenseMercerDefense
Effective FG%50.5%33 games · rank 248/36650.2%32 games · rank 140/366
Turnovers / possessions15.7%33 games · rank 122/36617.9%32 games · rank 112/366
Offensive rebound rate28.7%33 games · rank 263/36632.5%32 games · rank 298/366
Free-throw attempts / FGA28.8%33 games · rank 330/36628.3%32 games · rank 43/366
Three-point attempt share49.7%33 games41.6%32 games
Two-point FG%51.8%33 games · rank 208/36649.7%32 games · rank 102/366
Three-point FG%32.7%33 games · rank 256/36634.0%32 games · rank 211/366

Defense reports opponent rates, except turnovers forced. Each statistic pools its own valid numerators and denominators; game counts can differ. Three-point attempt share describes style and has no favorable rank.

Open The Citadel’s full dossier →

Mercer with the ball.

Historical rateMercerOffenseThe CitadelDefense
Effective FG%53.3%32 games · rank 104/36656.6%33 games · rank 361/366
Turnovers / possessions14.7%32 games · rank 52/36615.2%33 games · rank 296/366
Offensive rebound rate33.7%32 games · rank 93/36630.7%33 games · rank 226/366
Free-throw attempts / FGA37.5%32 games · rank 104/36632.3%33 games · rank 122/366
Three-point attempt share40.6%32 games43.6%33 games
Two-point FG%54.0%32 games · rank 111/36658.2%33 games · rank 362/366
Three-point FG%34.9%32 games · rank 131/36636.4%33 games · rank 340/366

Defense reports opponent rates, except turnovers forced. Each statistic pools its own valid numerators and denominators; game counts can differ. Three-point attempt share describes style and has no favorable rank.

Open Mercer’s full dossier →
Stat definitions and denominators

Effective FG%: (FGM + 0.5 × 3PM) / FGA.

Turnovers / possessions: Turnovers / estimated possessions.

Offensive rebound rate: ORB / (ORB + opponent DRB).

Free-throw attempts / FGA: FTA / FGA; displayed per 100 field-goal attempts.

Rates are pooled from the source records, not averages of game percentages. Rankings compare the 366 programs in the model field. Some source games include opponents outside Division I.

The pace question.

The Citadel recorded 65.1 possessions per 40 minutes across 33 paired games; Mercer recorded 70.9 across 32. The adjusted forecast for this matchup is 67.1. Identify which team’s personnel can dictate the first pass, early offense and transition balance; the historical tempo gap alone does not identify a tactical winner.

Five-v-five archive / source-native handoff

See which lineups actually shared the floor.

The matchup-stint archive keeps each publisher-native five-player group beside the opposing five, with possessions, repeat games and scoring margin. Search these teams to turn the factor question into a film assignment; the source IDs remain separate from the forecast and recruiting identities.

03 / Prior meetings / exact source IDs

What happened when these programs met?

2025–26 source schedule

This is a descriptive look at completed meetings where the home and away source team IDs matched exactly in the scouting archive. It is context for preparation, not a head-to-head forecast; a missing row means this source edition did not retain a qualifying meeting.

2Recorded meetings
20Mercer record
+27.0Average Mercer margin
Feb 14, 2026Latest shown
DateLocationScoreResultMarginEvidence
Feb 14, 2026Game 401809370Mercer road7054W+16.0ESPN source ↗
Jan 8, 2026Game 401809315Mercer home10163W+38.0ESPN source ↗
04 / Schedule-adjusted lens

What survives a harder schedule?

These four-factor role estimates adjust for opponent and season recency using the same team-and-venue design as the efficiency model. A positive gap means the offense’s favorable rate is stronger than the opposing defense’s corresponding rate. This is a descriptive lens for preparation, not a new forecast or a claim about the next rotation.

The Citadel offense vs Mercer defense.

Adjusted rateThe CitadelOffenseMercerDefenseFavorable gap
Offensive rebound rate27.4%30.6%-3.3 ppfavors this defense
Effective FG%48.7%51.4%-2.7 ppfavors this defense
Free-throw attempt rate32.3%33.8%-1.5 ppfavors this defense
Turnover rate18.1%17.3%-0.8 ppfavors this defense

For turnover rate, lower offensive turnover rate and higher forced-turnover rate are favorable. The other rows favor more efficient offense and lower opponent rates.

Mercer offense vs The Citadel defense.

Adjusted rateMercerOffenseThe CitadelDefenseFavorable gap
Effective FG%50.7%54.9%-4.2 ppfavors this defense
Free-throw attempt rate34.4%32.6%+1.8 ppfavors this offense
Turnover rate16.8%15.9%-0.9 ppfavors this defense
Offensive rebound rate30.8%31.2%-0.3 ppfavors this defense

For turnover rate, lower offensive turnover rate and higher forced-turnover rate are favorable. The other rows favor more efficient offense and lower opponent rates.

05 / Historical workload, then roster verification

Who carried the old possessions?

The three largest recorded minute totals on each 2025–26 team, among players with at least 200 minutes. These are historical contributors, not a projected 2026–27 rotation. Follow the player history and verify availability before assigning matchups.

The Citadel / 2025–26

Braxton WilliamsF · 33 games · 967 total minutes
29.3 MPG14.6 PPG28.4% est. usage52.7% TS

Usage sample: 33 games. An opportunity estimate from matched minutes and boxes, not measured on-court possessions.

Sola AdebisiF · 30 games · 965 total minutes
32.2 MPG10.0 PPG15.0% est. usage64.8% TS

Usage sample: 30 games. An opportunity estimate from matched minutes and boxes, not measured on-court possessions.

Carter KingsburyG · 31 games · 902 total minutes
29.1 MPG8.0 PPG16.5% est. usage52.7% TS

Usage sample: 31 games. An opportunity estimate from matched minutes and boxes, not measured on-court possessions.

Inspect the historical shot map →

Mercer / 2025–26

Baraka OkojieG · 31 games · 1,056 total minutes
34.1 MPG19.7 PPG28.6% est. usage57.0% TS

Usage sample: 31 games. An opportunity estimate from matched minutes and boxes, not measured on-court possessions.

Armani MightyC · 32 games · 996 total minutes
31.1 MPG13.2 PPG19.0% est. usage62.7% TS

Usage sample: 32 games. An opportunity estimate from matched minutes and boxes, not measured on-court possessions.

Zaire WilliamsG · 32 games · 913 total minutes
28.5 MPG13.1 PPG21.3% est. usage58.6% TS

Usage sample: 32 games. An opportunity estimate from matched minutes and boxes, not measured on-court possessions.

Inspect the historical shot map →
06 / Source roster observation

How much old workload is represented?

2026–27 listing · unconfirmed

This is an exact-ID comparison between the published 2026–27 roster listing and recorded 2025–26 minutes. It describes what the source currently represents; it does not establish eligibility, availability, a returning decision or a projected rotation, and it does not change the forecast.

The Citadel

Players listed18
Roster shape · G / F / C9 / 9 / 0
Listed as same program18
New to source dataset0
Returning IDs with prior minutes18
Prior minutes represented6,725 · 100.0%
Role workloadPrior minReturningIncomingUnrepresented
Guard9 listed3,200100%
Forward9 listed3,525100%
Center0 listed

Roster shape uses only the source-reported position labels on this listing; it is descriptive and does not identify a viable lineup or positional matchup.

Role rows use prior production attached to the currently listed source records. They are a narrower sample than the team denominator above; a missing or unclassified listing remains unknown.

The percentage uses 6,725 recorded 2025–26 minutes for this program as its denominator. A missing listing is not evidence of a departure; a new entry is not proof of a freshman or transfer.

Review roster observations and announcements →Build a role shortlist for The Citadel

Mercer

Players listed16
Roster shape · G / F / C10 / 5 / 1
Listed as same program14
New to source dataset2
Returning IDs with prior minutes14
Prior minutes represented6,399 · 100.0%
Role workloadPrior minReturningIncomingUnrepresented
Guard10 listed4,567100%
Forward5 listed836100%
Center1 listed996100%

Roster shape uses only the source-reported position labels on this listing; it is descriptive and does not identify a viable lineup or positional matchup.

Role rows use prior production attached to the currently listed source records. They are a narrower sample than the team denominator above; a missing or unclassified listing remains unknown.

The percentage uses 6,399 recorded 2025–26 minutes for this program as its denominator. A missing listing is not evidence of a departure; a new entry is not proof of a freshman or transfer.

Review roster observations and announcements →Build a role shortlist for Mercer
07 / Dated school evidence

What changed after those box scores?

Announcement board reviewed Sep 8, 2026

This board covers a limited set of schools. An announced addition does not by itself prove game-day availability. Later statements remain in the player’s timeline; a missing entry is not evidence that a player left or that a roster stayed unchanged.

The Citadel

This program is outside the reviewed school-announcement coverage in this edition. Check its official roster and availability reports.

Open the recruiting evidence board →

Mercer

This program is outside the reviewed school-announcement coverage in this edition. Check its official roster and availability reports.

Open the recruiting evidence board →
09 / Compare only matching records

The forecast and market trail.

Published ledger edition Sep 15, 2026. Only a record matching this game’s model, participants, start and prediction can appear here. Quotes are last qualifying observations, not verified closing lines or a live price feed.

Forecast registered . Status: Excluded · Start time unconfirmed.

No qualifying timestamped market comparison is available for this forecast in this ledger edition. A model-versus-market edge cannot be reported.

For spreads, a positive difference is model home margin plus the observed home spread; for totals it is model total minus the line; for moneylines it is model home probability minus the two-way normalized market probability. These are model disagreements, not placed bets or profit estimates.

Inspect this game’s complete forecast and source history →

Retained reading snapshots of this brief →

Your preparation / Private browser notes

Take it into the film room.

Loading browser notes…

How to read this brief.

The preseason model’s independent 2025–26 evaluation covered 5,734 games, with 10.26-point margin MAE and 79.1% empirical coverage for nominal 80% ranges. The weekly model experiment is separate from these forecasts.

Historical scouting and player statistics: Sep 12, 2026 source edition. Model: basketball-efficiency-v2-b7df2377c580. Training cutoff: 2026-09-12T12:53:26.061472Z. Model notebook and source receipts →

Bulk observations: SportsDataverse, whose publisher labels its datasets CC BY 4.0. Independent calculations and text templates: Silvermine. School announcements are linked individually. The film questions are hypotheses to verify, not measured descriptions of a current lineup.