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

Samford
vs Wofford

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 unconfirmedWofford designated home · Jerry Richardson Indoor Stadium

Samford77.6Projected away score
Preseason baselineWofford by 0.62Projected winning margin · 68.8 possessions / 40 min

Wofford win estimate 55.7%

Wofford78.2Projected home score

Projected total 155.8. Nominal 80% range for home scoring margin: -15.3 to +16.6. 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 55.7% · 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

Samford 100% prior minutes represented · Wofford 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+0.6 ptsModel is more favorable to the home side.Normal approximation: 52.0% chance the home margin clears this line.
Total edge+155.8 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 / A contrast to investigate

Protecting the possession

Samford offense Wofford defense

Samford · offense13.3%32 games · rank 12/366
Wofford · turnovers forced15.5%32 games · rank 269/366

Turnovers / possessions. Favorable percentile: 97.0 offense / 26.6 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 / A contrast to investigate

Finishing the possession

Samford offense Wofford defense

Samford · offense25.7%32 games · rank 336/366
Wofford · opponent rate28.5%32 games · rank 109/366

Offensive rebound rate. Favorable percentile: 8.2 offense / 70.4 defense. Higher favorable percentile is better, including for statistics where a lower raw rate is better.

On film: Who earns the second-chance possessions, and who must take the first box-out assignment? Check whether extra crashers leave transition chances at the other end.

03 / Offensive strength / defensive concern

Protecting the possession

Wofford offense Samford defense

Wofford · offense13.7%32 games · rank 18/366
Samford · turnovers forced13.3%32 games · rank 353/366

Turnovers / possessions. Favorable percentile: 95.3 offense / 3.6 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.

04 / A contrast to investigate

Finishing the possession

Wofford offense Samford defense

Wofford · offense31.0%32 games · rank 187/366
Samford · opponent rate25.2%32 games · rank 13/366

Offensive rebound rate. Favorable percentile: 49.0 offense / 96.7 defense. Higher favorable percentile is better, including for statistics where a lower raw rate is better.

On film: Who earns the second-chance possessions, and who must take the first box-out assignment? Check whether extra crashers leave transition chances at the other end.

02 / Both directions, all the evidence

The possession matchup.

Samford with the ball.

Historical rateSamfordOffenseWoffordDefense
Effective FG%53.7%32 games · rank 90/36653.6%32 games · rank 310/366
Turnovers / possessions13.3%32 games · rank 12/36615.5%32 games · rank 269/366
Offensive rebound rate25.7%32 games · rank 336/36628.5%32 games · rank 109/366
Free-throw attempts / FGA40.9%32 games · rank 42/36635.7%32 games · rank 221/366
Three-point attempt share46.5%32 games38.3%32 games
Two-point FG%53.7%32 games · rank 127/36653.1%32 games · rank 269/366
Three-point FG%35.8%32 games · rank 71/36636.3%32 games · rank 333/366

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 Samford’s full dossier →

Wofford with the ball.

Historical rateWoffordOffenseSamfordDefense
Effective FG%53.1%32 games · rank 113/36650.7%32 games · rank 171/366
Turnovers / possessions13.7%32 games · rank 18/36613.3%32 games · rank 353/366
Offensive rebound rate31.0%32 games · rank 187/36625.2%32 games · rank 13/366
Free-throw attempts / FGA36.3%32 games · rank 146/36631.4%32 games · rank 101/366
Three-point attempt share43.9%32 games35.9%32 games
Two-point FG%53.6%32 games · rank 129/36648.9%32 games · rank 75/366
Three-point FG%34.9%32 games · rank 125/36635.9%32 games · rank 319/366

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 Wofford’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.

Samford recorded 68.7 possessions per 40 minutes across 32 paired games; Wofford recorded 68.1 across 32. The adjusted forecast for this matchup is 68.8. 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
11Wofford record
-3.5Average Wofford margin
Feb 12, 2026Latest shown
DateLocationScoreResultMarginEvidence
Feb 12, 2026Game 401809365Wofford road8097L-17.0ESPN source ↗
Jan 21, 2026Game 401809337Wofford home8878W+10.0ESPN 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.

Samford offense vs Wofford defense.

Adjusted rateSamfordOffenseWoffordDefenseFavorable gap
Free-throw attempt rate37.6%35.9%+1.7 ppfavors this offense
Turnover rate16.6%15.4%-1.2 ppfavors this defense
Effective FG%53.4%52.7%+0.7 ppfavors this offense
Offensive rebound rate28.7%28.1%+0.6 ppfavors this offense

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.

Wofford offense vs Samford defense.

Adjusted rateWoffordOffenseSamfordDefenseFavorable gap
Free-throw attempt rate34.1%37.1%-3.0 ppfavors this defense
Turnover rate16.0%17.5%+1.6 ppfavors this offense
Offensive rebound rate30.5%29.2%+1.4 ppfavors this offense
Effective FG%52.3%52.3%0.0 ppfavors this offense

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.

Samford / 2025–26

Jadin BoothG · 30 games · 1,094 total minutes
36.5 MPG21.6 PPG25.9% est. usage64.8% TS

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

Cade NorrisG · 32 games · 983 total minutes
30.7 MPG8.9 PPG13.9% est. usage59.8% TS

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

Keaton NorrisG · 28 games · 921 total minutes
32.9 MPG10.0 PPG17.8% est. usage51.3% TS

Usage sample: 28 games. An opportunity estimate from matched minutes and boxes, not measured on-court possessions.

Inspect the historical shot map →

Wofford / 2025–26

Nils MachowskiG · 32 games · 1,078 total minutes
33.7 MPG17.2 PPG24.9% est. usage57.8% TS

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

Cayden VaskoG · 32 games · 1,021 total minutes
31.9 MPG10.4 PPG17.4% est. usage52.7% TS

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

Kahmare HolmesG · 26 games · 829 total minutes
31.9 MPG19.5 PPG29.9% est. usage57.3% TS

Usage sample: 26 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.

Samford

Players listed17
Roster shape · G / F / C11 / 5 / 1
Listed as same program13
New to source dataset4
Returning IDs with prior minutes13
Prior minutes represented6,475 · 100.0%
Role workloadPrior minReturningIncomingUnrepresented
Guard11 listed4,791100%
Forward5 listed1,395100%
Center1 listed289100%

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 6,475 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 Samford

Wofford

Players listed15
Roster shape · G / F / C10 / 4 / 1
Listed as same program14
New to source dataset1
Returning IDs with prior minutes14
Prior minutes represented6,425 · 100.0%
Role workloadPrior minReturningIncomingUnrepresented
Guard10 listed5,222100%
Forward4 listed1,153100%
Center1 listed50100%

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 6,425 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 Wofford
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.

Samford

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

Open the recruiting evidence board →

Wofford

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.