A relative strength
Turnovers forced
20.2% · rank 28 of 366 · 33 games
Which defensive actions produce takeaways, and what shots do they concede?
← Program librarySource edition Sep 12, 2026
The program dossier / men’s basketball
San Diego St
2025–26 performance, personnel and game context.
A starting point for 2026–27 preparation.
Independent preseason modelNo.43
+15.1 adjusted net
per 100 estimated possessions
22–112025–26 recorded finals
110.6Adjusted offense · 2026–27 baseline
95.5Adjusted defense · lower is better
68.2Model tempo · possessions / 40 min
Publisher lens / exact source team ID
A second read on San Diego St.
Checking the attributed publisher rating…
01 / Both ends of the floor
The possession profile.
22–1133 recorded games · 33 paired efficiency samples · pace 69.5Mean opponent adj. net 8.3 · 32 rated opponents
Offense
Effective FG%
53.2%33 games · higher is betterRank 110 / 366 · 70th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent effective FG%
47.9%33 games · lower is betterRank 50 / 366 · 87th favorable percentileOffense
Turnover rate
17.1%33 games · lower is betterRank 214 / 366 · 42th favorable percentileDefense
Turnovers forced
20.2%33 games · higher is betterRank 28 / 366 · 93th favorable percentileOffense
Offensive rebound rate
30.7%33 games · higher is betterRank 199 / 366 · 46th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent offensive rebound rate
30.6%33 games · lower is betterRank 216 / 366 · 41th favorable percentileOffense
Free-throw attempt rate
38.3%33 games · higher is betterRank 86 / 366 · 77th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent free-throw attempt rate
38.4%33 games · lower is betterRank 287 / 366 · 22th favorable percentileShooting and ball-movement detail
| Metric | Observed rate | Games | Definition |
|---|---|---|---|
| Offensive efficiency | 110.4 | 33 | Points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Defensive efficiency | 100.2 | 33 | Opponent points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Two-point FG% | 53.7% | 33 | (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Opponent two-point FG% | 45.9% | 33 | Opponent (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Three-point FG% | 34.7% | 33 | 3PM / 3PA. |
| Opponent three-point FG% | 33.5% | 33 | Opponent 3PM / 3PA. |
| Three-point attempt share | 33.2% | 33 | 3PA / FGA; a style measure, not a quality grade. |
| Opponent three-point attempt share | 47.4% | 33 | Opponent 3PA / FGA; a style measure. |
| Free-throw accuracy | 73.1% | 33 | FTM / FTA. |
| Opponent free-throw accuracy | 72.8% | 33 | Opponent FTM / FTA; not attributed to defensive skill. |
| Assisted field-goal share | 54.2% | 33 | Assists / FGM; describes recorded ball movement. |
| Opponent assisted FG share | 58.1% | 33 | 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?
2,347 source possession rows across 33 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
Opponent effective FG%
47.9% · rank 50 of 366 · 33 games
What coverages and lineups account for the shot quality opponents receive?
A closer look
Opponent offensive rebound rate
30.6% · rank 216 of 366 · 33 games
Which matchups demand an extra box-out assignment?
A closer look
Opponent free-throw attempt rate
38.4% · rank 287 of 366 · 33 games
Which defenders can protect the paint without surrendering free throws?
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 9 times in the selected window; San Diego St won 5. 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 14, 2026 · neutral vs Utah State · L 62–73 · offense 95.0 / defense 111.8
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 · 33 games
| Game / venue | Result | Current opponent rank | Off. eff. | Def. eff. | Pace | eFG% | TO% | ORB% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Utah StateMar 14, 2026 · neutral | L 62–73 | 30 | 95.0 | 111.8 | 65.3 | 45.9 | 21.4 | 28.6 |
| New MexicoMar 14, 2026 · neutral | W 64–62 | 40 | 96.8 | 93.7 | 66.1 | 45.5 | 19.7 | 31.6 |
| Colorado StMar 13, 2026 · neutral | W 71–62 | 67 | 102.1 | 89.1 | 69.6 | 49.0 | 18.7 | 38.9 |
| UNLVMar 7, 2026 · home | W 89–86 | 111 | 120.7 | 116.6 | 73.7 | 63.3 | 16.3 | 24.1 |
| Boise StMar 4, 2026 · road | L 77–86 | 50 | 113.1 | 126.3 | 68.1 | 54.5 | 10.3 | 7.4 |
| New MexicoFeb 28, 2026 · road | L 76–81 | 40 | 108.1 | 115.3 | 70.3 | 52.5 | 10.0 | 20.0 |
| Utah StateFeb 26, 2026 · home | W 89–72 | 30 | 128.0 | 103.5 | 69.5 | 60.9 | 17.3 | 40.0 |
| Colorado StFeb 21, 2026 · road | L 74–83 | 67 | 109.5 | 122.8 | 67.6 | 45.0 | 17.8 | 38.5 |
| Grand CanyonFeb 18, 2026 · home | L 63–73 | 65 | 88.4 | 102.5 | 71.2 | 37.9 | 18.2 | 30.8 |
| NevadaFeb 15, 2026 · home | W 71–57 | 59 | 113.2 | 90.9 | 62.7 | 50.9 | 15.9 | 28.6 |
| Air ForceFeb 8, 2026 · road | W 88–54 | 347 | 125.4 | 77.0 | 70.2 | 65.0 | 8.6 | 16.0 |
| WyomingFeb 4, 2026 · home | W 72–63 | 132 | 107.1 | 93.7 | 67.2 | 48.0 | 14.9 | 39.3 |
| Utah StateJan 31, 2026 · road | L 66–71 | 30 | 87.7 | 94.4 | 75.2 | 45.6 | 17.3 | 16.2 |
| Colorado StJan 29, 2026 · home | W 73–50 | 67 | 119.9 | 82.2 | 60.9 | 60.0 | 19.7 | 40.9 |
| UNLVJan 24, 2026 · road | W 82–71 | 111 | 120.8 | 104.6 | 67.9 | 65.2 | 19.1 | 14.3 |
| Grand CanyonJan 22, 2026 · road | L 69–70 | 65 | 97.6 | 99.1 | 70.7 | 42.7 | 14.2 | 28.9 |
| New MexicoJan 18, 2026 · home | W 83–79 | 40 | 106.3 | 101.1 | 78.1 | 55.5 | 20.5 | 23.5 |
| WyomingJan 15, 2026 · road | W 74–57 | 132 | 112.4 | 86.6 | 65.8 | 56.3 | 12.2 | 16.7 |
| Fresno StJan 11, 2026 · home | W 71–52 | 188 | 95.9 | 70.3 | 74.0 | 44.3 | 14.9 | 30.2 |
| NevadaJan 7, 2026 · road | W 73–68 | 59 | 113.6 | 105.8 | 64.3 | 55.6 | 20.2 | 40.0 |
| Boise StJan 4, 2026 · home | W 110–107 | 50 | 114.6 | 111.5 | 69.8 | 61.0 | 14.6 | 20.0 |
| San José StDec 31, 2025 · road | W 81–68 | 226 | 111.1 | 93.3 | 72.9 | 58.5 | 22.0 | 39.3 |
| WhittierDec 22, 2025 · home | W 121–59 | Unrated | 157.6 | 76.9 | 76.8 | 63.7 | 13.0 | 64.9 |
| ArizonaDec 21, 2025 · neutral | L 45–68 | 3 | 71.5 | 108.1 | 62.9 | 27.2 | 12.7 | 23.8 |
| Air ForceDec 18, 2025 · home | W 81–58 | 347 | 126.8 | 90.8 | 63.9 | 59.0 | 17.2 | 39.4 |
| LamarDec 11, 2025 · home | W 89–71 | 232 | 116.9 | 93.3 | 76.1 | 55.0 | 17.1 | 36.4 |
| Utah ValleyDec 4, 2025 · home | W 77–66 | 100 | 109.7 | 94.0 | 70.2 | 49.1 | 18.5 | 36.4 |
| BaylorNov 27, 2025 · neutral | L 81–91 | 33 | 114.6 | 128.8 | 70.7 | 56.8 | 14.2 | 18.8 |
| OregonNov 26, 2025 · neutral | W 97–80 | 61 | 137.9 | 113.7 | 70.4 | 76.7 | 21.3 | 40.0 |
| MichiganNov 25, 2025 · neutral | L 54–94 | 6 | 71.5 | 124.5 | 75.5 | 33.1 | 22.5 | 26.1 |
| TroyNov 19, 2025 · home | L 107–108 | 123 | 119.4 | 120.5 | 71.7 | 53.7 | 22.3 | 45.5 |
| Idaho StNov 9, 2025 · home | W 73–57 | 239 | 118.4 | 92.4 | 61.7 | 65.3 | 19.5 | 23.8 |
| Long Beach StNov 5, 2025 · home | W 77–45 | 265 | 108.1 | 63.2 | 71.2 | 52.5 | 21.1 | 34.3 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reese Dixon-WatersG | 32 | 30.1 | 13.1 | 3.6 | 1.2 | 55.9 | 22.0% | 32 | 0.9132 games | 14632 games |
| Miles ByrdG | 33 | 28.1 | 10.4 | 4.7 | 2.6 | 52.8 | 21.2% | 33 | 1.3433 games | 14333 games |
| BJ DavisG | 33 | 22.3 | 10.8 | 3.2 | 2.2 | 57.5 | 23.6% | 33 | 2.3233 games | 9933 games |
| Taj DeGourvilleG | 33 | 19.4 | 5.5 | 2.8 | 3.0 | 46.5 | 19.2% | 33 | 2.0033 games | 5533 games |
| Miles HeideF | 32 | 19.1 | 5.6 | 4.5 | 0.8 | 60.9 | 14.9% | 32 | 0.8232 games | 732 games |
| Sean Newman Jr.G | 33 | 15.5 | 3.3 | 1.2 | 2.4 | 48.6 | 13.7% | 33 | 2.7933 games | 3233 games |
| Elzie HarringtonG | 23 | 21.0 | 8.0 | 1.6 | 2.3 | 56.8 | 20.7% | 23 | 1.3323 games | 3923 games |
| Magoon GwathF | 25 | 19.0 | 8.9 | 4.3 | 0.3 | 59.2 | 23.4% | 25 | 0.2225 games | 4625 games |
| Tae SimmonsF | 32 | 14.3 | 5.8 | 3.4 | 0.3 | 65.9 | 17.3% | 32 | 0.6432 games | 832 games |
| Pharaoh ComptonF | 33 | 13.8 | 7.5 | 2.8 | 0.3 | 70.9 | 21.9% | 33 | 0.4633 games | 233 games |
| Jeremiah OdenF | 30 | 13.8 | 4.6 | 2.3 | 0.4 | 54.1 | 17.3% | 30 | 0.7330 games | 5330 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 San Diego St?
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
13Same-program prior records
0Different-program records
86%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 | 3,320 | 3,320 | — | 100% | — |
| Forward | 6 | 2,443 | 2,443 | — | 100% | — |
| Center | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
0 listed players have no recognized source position. The workload denominator is the matched prior-production sample (5,763 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% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Miles Byrd →G | Same programSan Diego State Aztecs | 28.1 | 10.4 | 52.8% |
| BJ Davis →G | Same programSan Diego State Aztecs | 22.3 | 10.8 | 57.5% |
| Taj DeGourville →G | Same programSan Diego State Aztecs | 19.4 | 5.5 | 46.5% |
| Miles Heide →F | Same programSan Diego State Aztecs | 19.1 | 5.6 | 60.9% |
| Sean Newman Jr. →G | Same programSan Diego State Aztecs | 15.5 | 3.3 | 48.6% |
| Elzie Harrington →G | Same programSan Diego State Aztecs | 21.0 | 8.0 | 56.8% |
| Magoon Gwath →F | Same programSan Diego State Aztecs | 19.0 | 8.9 | 59.2% |
| Tae Simmons →F | Same programSan Diego State Aztecs | 14.3 | 5.8 | 65.9% |
| Pharaoh Compton →F | Same programSan Diego State Aztecs | 13.8 | 7.5 | 70.9% |
| Jeremiah Oden →F | Same programSan Diego State Aztecs | 13.8 | 4.6 | 54.1% |
| Thokbor Majak →F | Same programSan Diego State Aztecs | 4.3 | 0.3 | 15.4% |
| Cam Lawin →G | Same programSan Diego State Aztecs | 2.6 | 2.6 | 92.9% |
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…
Colorado vs San Diego St
70.5Colorado
73.7San Diego St
San Diego St win estimate62.6%
Model signalLean
Projected home margin3.2
Projected total144.1
80% home-margin range-12.7 to 19.1
Estimated possessions69.1
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityAway 4.6 pts
San Diego St attack 52.1% · Colorado defense 49.9%Colorado attack 53.5% · San Diego St defense 46.6%
Ball securityAway 2.8 pts
San Diego St attack 16.7% · Colorado defense 16.4%Colorado attack 17.1% · San Diego St defense 19.5%
Second chancesHome 2.3 pts
San Diego St attack 30.9% · Colorado defense 26.7%Colorado attack 30.9% · San Diego St defense 28.9%
Free-throw pressureHome 0.6 pts
San Diego St attack 36.8% · Colorado defense 34.6%Colorado attack 36.8% · San Diego St defense 35.2%
Pechanga Arena
Preseason baseline · roster changes are not model features.
No verified pregame market line imported. Check the forecast record →
San Diego St vs Iowa State
64.7San Diego St
73.7Iowa State
Iowa State win estimate76.0%
Model signalStrong lean
Projected home margin9.0
Projected total138.4
80% home-margin range-6.9 to 25.0
Estimated possessions68.1
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityHome 4.9 pts
Iowa State attack 55.3% · San Diego St defense 46.6%San Diego St attack 52.1% · Iowa State defense 48.3%
Ball securityAway 2.0 pts
Iowa State attack 15.7% · San Diego St defense 19.5%San Diego St attack 16.7% · Iowa State defense 22.5%
Second chancesHome 0.7 pts
Iowa State attack 33.8% · San Diego St defense 28.9%San Diego St attack 30.9% · Iowa State defense 26.7%
Free-throw pressureAway 4.0 pts
Iowa State attack 36.3% · San Diego St defense 35.2%San Diego St attack 36.8% · Iowa State defense 31.7%
Michelob ULTRA Arena
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 →