A relative strength
Effective FG%
52.4% · rank 154 of 366 · 31 games
Which actions create the team's efficient looks, and which personnel can reproduce them?
← Program librarySource edition Sep 12, 2026
The program dossier / men’s basketball
Northeastern
2025–26 performance, personnel and game context.
A starting point for 2026–27 preparation.
Independent preseason modelNo.262
-7.3 adjusted net
per 100 estimated possessions
7–242025–26 recorded finals
104.9Adjusted offense · 2026–27 baseline
112.2Adjusted defense · lower is better
69.1Model tempo · possessions / 40 min
Publisher lens / exact source team ID
A second read on Northeastern.
Checking the attributed publisher rating…
01 / Both ends of the floor
The possession profile.
7–2431 recorded games · 31 paired efficiency samples · pace 69.6Mean opponent adj. net -2.5 · 31 rated opponents
Offense
Effective FG%
52.4%31 games · higher is betterRank 154 / 366 · 58th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent effective FG%
56.4%31 games · lower is betterRank 358 / 366 · 2th favorable percentileOffense
Turnover rate
16.4%31 games · lower is betterRank 167 / 366 · 55th favorable percentileDefense
Turnovers forced
16.8%31 games · higher is betterRank 182 / 366 · 50th favorable percentileOffense
Offensive rebound rate
27.3%31 games · higher is betterRank 300 / 366 · 18th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent offensive rebound rate
30.2%31 games · lower is betterRank 188 / 366 · 49th favorable percentileOffense
Free-throw attempt rate
29.4%31 games · higher is betterRank 318 / 366 · 13th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent free-throw attempt rate
41.9%31 games · lower is betterRank 333 / 366 · 9th favorable percentileShooting and ball-movement detail
| Metric | Observed rate | Games | Definition |
|---|---|---|---|
| Offensive efficiency | 107.1 | 31 | Points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Defensive efficiency | 115.8 | 31 | Opponent points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Two-point FG% | 53.6% | 31 | (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Opponent two-point FG% | 57.8% | 31 | Opponent (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Three-point FG% | 33.7% | 31 | 3PM / 3PA. |
| Opponent three-point FG% | 35.8% | 31 | Opponent 3PM / 3PA. |
| Three-point attempt share | 37.8% | 31 | 3PA / FGA; a style measure, not a quality grade. |
| Opponent three-point attempt share | 35.2% | 31 | Opponent 3PA / FGA; a style measure. |
| Free-throw accuracy | 69.0% | 31 | FTM / FTA. |
| Opponent free-throw accuracy | 73.9% | 31 | Opponent FTM / FTA; not attributed to defensive skill. |
| Assisted field-goal share | 55.7% | 31 | Assists / FGM; describes recorded ball movement. |
| Opponent assisted FG share | 50.2% | 31 | Opponent assists / FGM. |
Window changes describe the historical sample; they do not refit the preseason model. Full-season ranks require 10 games. Percentiles compare qualifying programs in the model’s rated field. Source coverage can differ by metric.
NCAA source context / 2025–26
What did the possessions look like?
2,182 source possession rows across 31 recorded team-games. These are descriptive NCAA source aggregates: they do not assign individual credit or enter the forecast.
02 / The film queue
Turn a number into a question.
A relative strength
Turnover rate
16.4% · rank 167 of 366 · 31 games
Where do turnovers occur under pressure, and who can relieve that pressure?
A closer look
Opponent free-throw attempt rate
41.9% · rank 333 of 366 · 31 games
Which defenders can protect the paint without surrendering free throws?
A closer look
Opponent effective FG%
56.4% · rank 358 of 366 · 31 games
What coverages and lineups account for the shot quality opponents receive?
These are stat-led film prompts, not verified explanations of a scheme. Lower-ranked factors can still be above average. A five-point-or-closer final occurred 4 times in the selected window; Northeastern won 1. That small-sample record is not a clutch-skill estimate.
03 / How the season moved
Read beyond the average.
● Offense● Opponent offenseRaw points / 100 possessions · game order
Mar 7, 2026 · neutral vs Drexel · L 77–84 · offense 112.0 / defense 122.2
Higher offense and lower opponent offense are better. Opponent strength and venue are not adjusted here. Missing paired boxes create gaps.
Open the game-by-game scouting log · 31 games
| Game / venue | Result | Current opponent rank | Off. eff. | Def. eff. | Pace | eFG% | TO% | ORB% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DrexelMar 7, 2026 · neutral | L 77–84 | 185 | 112.0 | 122.2 | 68.8 | 48.4 | 10.2 | 32.4 |
| NC A&TMar 6, 2026 · neutral | W 88–72 | 318 | 122.9 | 100.5 | 71.6 | 58.1 | 15.4 | 33.3 |
| MonmouthMar 4, 2026 · home | L 83–89 | 211 | 123.9 | 132.9 | 67.0 | 64.7 | 17.9 | 29.6 |
| HamptonFeb 28, 2026 · road | L 65–76 | 288 | 98.6 | 115.2 | 65.9 | 41.1 | 9.1 | 26.8 |
| William & MaryFeb 27, 2026 · road | L 77–84 | 195 | 96.4 | 105.1 | 79.9 | 59.2 | 27.5 | 18.8 |
| HofstraFeb 21, 2026 · home | L 68–82 | 115 | 106.1 | 128.0 | 64.1 | 46.2 | 9.4 | 30.0 |
| DrexelFeb 20, 2026 · home | L 61–70 | 185 | 91.0 | 104.4 | 67.0 | 44.6 | 16.4 | 18.9 |
| William & MaryFeb 13, 2026 · home | L 67–94 | 195 | 96.2 | 135.0 | 69.7 | 48.4 | 17.2 | 24.3 |
| Stony BrookFeb 7, 2026 · road | L 55–69 | 280 | 82.0 | 102.9 | 67.1 | 38.6 | 17.9 | 26.2 |
| HofstraFeb 6, 2026 · road | L 63–80 | 115 | 94.9 | 120.5 | 66.4 | 52.9 | 18.1 | 10.0 |
| CharlestonJan 31, 2026 · home | L 84–89 | 135 | 122.0 | 129.2 | 68.9 | 56.2 | 7.3 | 33.3 |
| DrexelJan 24, 2026 · road | L 78–83 | 185 | 112.4 | 119.6 | 69.4 | 53.2 | 11.5 | 26.5 |
| Stony BrookJan 23, 2026 · home | L 80–95 | 280 | 112.3 | 133.3 | 71.3 | 55.4 | 11.2 | 25.6 |
| MonmouthJan 19, 2026 · road | L 68–81 | 211 | 94.9 | 113.0 | 71.7 | 46.8 | 25.1 | 35.1 |
| ElonJan 16, 2026 · home | W 85–78 | 237 | 112.8 | 103.5 | 75.4 | 54.2 | 14.6 | 29.4 |
| TowsonJan 10, 2026 · home | L 78–87 | 150 | 113.4 | 126.5 | 68.8 | 50.8 | 11.6 | 20.0 |
| UNC WilmingtonJan 9, 2026 · home | L 78–87 | 113 | 107.2 | 119.5 | 72.8 | 52.5 | 9.6 | 21.6 |
| CampbellJan 3, 2026 · road | L 82–97 | 208 | 113.6 | 134.3 | 72.2 | 60.2 | 15.2 | 14.3 |
| NC A&TDec 31, 2025 · road | W 85–74 | 318 | 129.7 | 113.0 | 65.5 | 60.7 | 10.7 | 28.1 |
| ElonDec 30, 2025 · road | L 91–103 | 237 | 126.4 | 143.1 | 72.0 | 69.0 | 18.1 | 27.6 |
| Rhode IslandDec 23, 2025 · road | L 77–85 | 158 | 118.9 | 131.3 | 64.7 | 59.2 | 20.1 | 32.1 |
| SyracuseDec 20, 2025 · road | L 83–91 | 102 | 119.2 | 130.7 | 69.7 | 53.8 | 18.7 | 45.9 |
| C ConnecticutDec 7, 2025 · home | W 73–56 | 260 | 106.8 | 81.9 | 68.4 | 54.5 | 14.6 | 19.4 |
| Holy CrossDec 3, 2025 · road | L 59–76 | 334 | 88.7 | 114.3 | 66.5 | 45.9 | 19.6 | 26.8 |
| Wake ForestNov 28, 2025 · road | L 73–86 | 60 | 99.6 | 117.3 | 73.3 | 60.8 | 30.0 | 21.4 |
| DuquesneNov 22, 2025 · neutral | W 93–86 | 129 | 110.0 | 101.7 | 84.6 | 59.5 | 24.8 | 29.0 |
| PrincetonNov 21, 2025 · road | L 57–70 | 184 | 85.0 | 104.4 | 67.1 | 39.0 | 19.4 | 33.3 |
| VermontNov 15, 2025 · home | L 74–85 | 194 | 106.0 | 121.7 | 69.8 | 51.8 | 21.5 | 30.3 |
| HarvardNov 12, 2025 · road | W 77–60 | 175 | 115.5 | 90.0 | 66.7 | 52.5 | 12.0 | 30.0 |
| ColgateNov 7, 2025 · road | W 68–65 | 209 | 101.1 | 96.7 | 67.2 | 42.4 | 10.4 | 27.5 |
| Boston UNov 4, 2025 · home | L 75–76 | 270 | 100.8 | 102.1 | 66.2 | 47.5 | 17.5 | 29.7 |
04 / The people behind the possessions
Personnel and workload.
2025–26 recorded affiliations, independent of the split selector. This is not a confirmed 2026–27 roster. Inspect roster observations →
| Player | GP | MIN/G | PTS/G | REB/G | AST/G | TS% | Est. usage | Usage games | AST/TO | 3PA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mike LoughnaneG | 31 | 30.9 | 10.2 | 2.9 | 3.8 | 55.3 | 17.6% | 31 | 2.3931 games | 11131 games |
| William KermouryG | 27 | 26.9 | 13.1 | 3.2 | 2.3 | 59.2 | 23.5% | 27 | 1.5627 games | 18427 games |
| Youri FritzF | 25 | 25.9 | 9.8 | 5.4 | 1.5 | 58.7 | 19.4% | 25 | 0.9725 games | 325 games |
| JB FrankelG | 30 | 20.7 | 5.9 | 2.0 | 1.9 | 45.7 | 18.0% | 30 | 2.0430 games | 11130 games |
| Xavier AbreuG | 29 | 21.0 | 12.6 | 2.7 | 1.0 | 54.0 | 30.6% | 29 | 0.9429 games | 9229 games |
| Luca Soroa SchallerG | 29 | 20.7 | 5.6 | 3.4 | 2.2 | 45.7 | 19.4% | 29 | 1.1529 games | 5329 games |
| Ryan WilliamsG | 28 | 14.7 | 7.4 | 1.1 | 1.6 | 65.6 | 21.4% | 28 | 2.7528 games | 7328 games |
| Petar PinterC | 26 | 14.3 | 3.3 | 2.1 | 0.4 | 55.4 | 13.0% | 26 | 0.5926 games | 026 games |
| Ty FrancisF | 24 | 15.0 | 4.5 | 2.6 | 0.4 | 54.1 | 16.5% | 24 | 0.6724 games | 1924 games |
| Xander AlarieF | 11 | 27.7 | 10.3 | 7.4 | 1.5 | 53.8 | 20.9% | 11 | 0.6711 games | 1911 games |
| Liam KoelschC | 26 | 8.6 | 1.8 | 2.3 | 0.2 | 52.3 | 10.8% | 26 | 2.0026 games | 026 games |
Usage is a minutes-based estimate over the stated sample, not a direct measure of on-court possessions. Low-minute estimates are noisy. AST/TO is unavailable when recorded turnovers are zero; missing fields are never filled with zero.
05 / Recruiting evidence
What changed around Northeastern?
This panel keeps dated school publications, source-listed roster observations and prior college production in separate evidence lanes. A source record does not establish eligibility, availability or a future role.
14Source-listed players
14Same-program prior records
0Different-program records
100%Prior minutes represented
Role workload watch
Which source-listed role is represented?
Prior minutes are grouped by the source-reported position on the current listing. “Unrepresented” means prior minutes not attached to a same-program listing in this release; it does not establish a departure, transfer, eligibility or expected role.
| Role | Listed | Prior minutes | Returning minutes | Incoming prior minutes | Returning share | Unrepresented |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Guard | 8 | 4,178 | 4,178 | — | 100% | — |
| Forward | 4 | 1,452 | 1,452 | — | 100% | — |
| Center | 2 | 595 | 595 | — | 100% | — |
0 listed players have no recognized source position. The workload denominator is the matched prior-production sample (6,225 minutes).
No dated school announcement is in the selected review file for this program. The roster row below is observation-only; absence of a reviewed announcement does not mean the program made no move.
No announced additions are in the reviewed file for this program.
Roster observation
Who is listed in the source release?
14 source-listed players. Prior rates below are attached by exact source ID where available; missing values remain missing.
| Player | Observation | Prior MPG | Prior PPG | Prior TS% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mike Loughnane →G | Same programNortheastern Huskies | 30.9 | 10.2 | 55.3% |
| William Kermoury →G | Same programNortheastern Huskies | 26.9 | 13.1 | 59.2% |
| Youri Fritz →F | Same programNortheastern Huskies | 25.9 | 9.8 | 58.7% |
| JB Frankel →G | Same programNortheastern Huskies | 20.7 | 5.9 | 45.7% |
| Xavier Abreu →G | Same programNortheastern Huskies | 21.0 | 12.6 | 54.0% |
| Luca Soroa Schaller →G | Same programNortheastern Huskies | 20.7 | 5.6 | 45.7% |
| Ryan Williams →G | Same programNortheastern Huskies | 14.7 | 7.4 | 65.6% |
| Petar Pinter →C | Same programNortheastern Huskies | 14.3 | 3.3 | 55.4% |
| Ty Francis →F | Same programNortheastern Huskies | 15.0 | 4.5 | 54.1% |
| Xander Alarie →F | Same programNortheastern Huskies | 27.7 | 10.3 | 53.8% |
| Liam Koelsch →C | Same programNortheastern Huskies | 8.6 | 1.8 | 52.3% |
| Miles Newton →G | Same programNortheastern Huskies | 16.8 | 5.4 | 60.1% |
Showing the 12 highest prior-minute records. Open the full roster board for every source-listed player.
Recruiting review edition Sep 8, 2026 · coverage is partial (14 programs reviewed). See the full methodology and coverage map before drawing a roster conclusion.
Look ahead / 2026–27
The next assignments.
Checking the live schedule edition…
Northeastern vs Butler
69.7Northeastern
84.7Butler
Butler win estimate85.9%
Model signalStrong lean
Projected home margin15.0
Projected total154.4
80% home-margin range-0.9 to 31.0
Estimated possessions69.9
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityAway 2.3 pts
Butler attack 52.9% · Northeastern defense 53.7%Northeastern attack 51.6% · Butler defense 50.2%
Ball securityHome 3.8 pts
Butler attack 15.9% · Northeastern defense 17.0%Northeastern attack 18.1% · Butler defense 15.4%
Second chancesAway 1.1 pts
Butler attack 29.8% · Northeastern defense 29.9%Northeastern attack 29.4% · Butler defense 28.3%
Free-throw pressureAway 4.6 pts
Butler attack 37.6% · Northeastern defense 36.4%Northeastern attack 31.6% · Butler defense 25.8%
Hinkle Fieldhouse
Preseason baseline · roster changes are not model features.
No verified pregame market line imported. Check the forecast record →
UMass vs Northeastern
77.5UMass
76.7Northeastern
Northeastern win estimate51.7%
Model signalToss-up
Projected home margin-0.9
Projected total154.2
80% home-margin range-16.8 to 15.1
Estimated possessions71.3
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityHome 4.1 pts
Northeastern attack 51.6% · UMass defense 51.4%UMass attack 49.9% · Northeastern defense 53.7%
Ball securityAway 0.3 pts
Northeastern attack 18.1% · UMass defense 17.3%UMass attack 17.5% · Northeastern defense 17.0%
Second chancesAway 2.7 pts
Northeastern attack 29.4% · UMass defense 28.7%UMass attack 33.2% · Northeastern defense 29.9%
Free-throw pressureAway 8.8 pts
Northeastern attack 31.6% · UMass defense 40.2%UMass attack 36.6% · Northeastern defense 36.4%
Cabot Center
Preseason baseline · roster changes are not model features.
No verified pregame market line imported. Check the forecast record →
Northeastern vs Boston College
67.2Northeastern
76.2Boston College
Boston College win estimate75.9%
Model signalStrong lean
Projected home margin9.0
Projected total143.4
80% home-margin range-6.9 to 24.9
Estimated possessions68.0
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityAway 6.0 pts
Boston College attack 49.8% · Northeastern defense 53.7%Northeastern attack 51.6% · Boston College defense 49.6%
Ball securityHome 2.5 pts
Boston College attack 16.5% · Northeastern defense 17.0%Northeastern attack 18.1% · Boston College defense 16.1%
Second chancesAway 2.1 pts
Boston College attack 29.1% · Northeastern defense 29.9%Northeastern attack 29.4% · Boston College defense 28.2%
Free-throw pressureAway 1.4 pts
Boston College attack 32.5% · Northeastern defense 36.4%Northeastern attack 31.6% · Boston College defense 34.1%
Conte Forum
Preseason baseline · roster changes are not model features.
No verified pregame market line imported. Check the forecast record →
Read the evidence correctly.
The top-line adjusted ratings use the full published preseason model. Split statistics below them are unadjusted observations from 2025–26. Opponent ranks are the current model’s ranks, not what was known before each historical game. The “top 50” split is descriptive and does not enter model evaluation.
Rates pool numerators and denominators from games with all fields required for that metric. Missing values remain unavailable; every metric shows its game count. Ranks require at least 10 games and compare programs in the model’s rated field. Ties share rank; percentiles use their average position. High percentiles mean favorable values only for metrics with a defined direction.
Player workloads refer to recorded 2025–26 appearances. Estimated usage divides FGA + 0.475 × FTA + turnovers by minutes-prorated team opportunities in those same games. It assumes team opportunity rates were constant while a player was on court; it is not a lineup or play-by-play measurement. Overtime is included in available minutes. Minutes and usage samples can differ.
Source statistics: SportsDataverse bulk releases, CC BY 4.0. Calculations and model: Silvermine. Definitions draw on publicly documented Four Factors and basketball rate statistics; these are not another publisher’s proprietary ratings. Model notebook →