A relative strength
Turnovers forced
19.8% · rank 37 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
E Illinois
2025–26 performance, personnel and game context.
A starting point for 2026–27 preparation.
Independent preseason modelNo.327
-13.5 adjusted net
per 100 estimated possessions
13–202025–26 recorded finals
95.8Adjusted offense · 2026–27 baseline
109.3Adjusted defense · lower is better
67.1Model tempo · possessions / 40 min
Publisher lens / exact source team ID
A second read on E Illinois.
Checking the attributed publisher rating…
01 / Both ends of the floor
The possession profile.
13–2033 recorded games · 33 paired efficiency samples · pace 66.6Mean opponent adj. net -4.4 · 30 rated opponents
Offense
Effective FG%
47.6%33 games · higher is betterRank 341 / 366 · 7th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent effective FG%
49.9%33 games · lower is betterRank 122 / 366 · 67th favorable percentileOffense
Turnover rate
18.5%33 games · lower is betterRank 303 / 366 · 17th favorable percentileDefense
Turnovers forced
19.8%33 games · higher is betterRank 37 / 366 · 90th favorable percentileOffense
Offensive rebound rate
29.4%33 games · higher is betterRank 241 / 366 · 34th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent offensive rebound rate
33.4%33 games · lower is betterRank 322 / 366 · 12th favorable percentileOffense
Free-throw attempt rate
33.2%33 games · higher is betterRank 226 / 366 · 38th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent free-throw attempt rate
33.3%33 games · lower is betterRank 151 / 366 · 59th favorable percentileShooting and ball-movement detail
| Metric | Observed rate | Games | Definition |
|---|---|---|---|
| Offensive efficiency | 99.6 | 33 | Points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Defensive efficiency | 104.4 | 33 | Opponent points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Two-point FG% | 47.3% | 33 | (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Opponent two-point FG% | 51.9% | 33 | Opponent (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Three-point FG% | 32.3% | 33 | 3PM / 3PA. |
| Opponent three-point FG% | 31.4% | 33 | Opponent 3PM / 3PA. |
| Three-point attempt share | 30.1% | 33 | 3PA / FGA; a style measure, not a quality grade. |
| Opponent three-point attempt share | 42.4% | 33 | Opponent 3PA / FGA; a style measure. |
| Free-throw accuracy | 73.5% | 33 | FTM / FTA. |
| Opponent free-throw accuracy | 74.2% | 33 | Opponent FTM / FTA; not attributed to defensive skill. |
| Assisted field-goal share | 51.1% | 33 | Assists / FGM; describes recorded ball movement. |
| Opponent assisted FG share | 57.7% | 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?
2,231 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%
49.9% · rank 122 of 366 · 33 games
What coverages and lineups account for the shot quality opponents receive?
A closer look
Opponent offensive rebound rate
33.4% · rank 322 of 366 · 33 games
Which matchups demand an extra box-out assignment?
A closer look
Effective FG%
47.6% · rank 341 of 366 · 33 games
Which actions create the team's efficient looks, and which personnel can reproduce them?
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 10 times in the selected window; E Illinois won 4. 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 6, 2026 · neutral vs UT Martin · L 63–66 · offense 101.8 / defense 106.7
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% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UT MartinMar 6, 2026 · neutral | L 63–66 | 234 | 101.8 | 106.7 | 61.9 | 50.9 | 19.4 | 26.5 |
| SIUEMar 5, 2026 · neutral | W 77–71 | 231 | 111.5 | 102.8 | 61.4 | 54.1 | 14.5 | 27.3 |
| SIUEFeb 28, 2026 · road | L 50–77 | 231 | 83.0 | 127.9 | 60.2 | 41.5 | 19.9 | 24.2 |
| LindenwoodFeb 27, 2026 · road | W 71–67 | 304 | 102.7 | 96.9 | 69.2 | 46.9 | 18.8 | 25.8 |
| So IndianaFeb 21, 2026 · home | L 68–70 | 338 | 103.9 | 106.9 | 65.5 | 41.4 | 15.3 | 45.0 |
| Morehead StFeb 20, 2026 · home | L 70–73 | 276 | 105.5 | 110.0 | 66.3 | 46.0 | 13.6 | 31.4 |
| Little RockFeb 14, 2026 · home | W 78–72 | 275 | 117.5 | 108.4 | 66.4 | 43.8 | 12.0 | 48.8 |
| W IllinoisFeb 11, 2026 · road | L 70–79 | 362 | 97.2 | 109.7 | 72.0 | 49.2 | 15.3 | 24.3 |
| Tennessee TechFeb 7, 2026 · road | W 60–54 | 315 | 93.0 | 83.7 | 64.6 | 43.5 | 15.5 | 21.9 |
| Tennessee StFeb 6, 2026 · road | L 68–77 | 204 | 98.6 | 111.6 | 69.0 | 56.9 | 24.6 | 23.1 |
| SE MissouriJan 31, 2026 · home | L 59–77 | 243 | 90.5 | 118.1 | 65.2 | 47.1 | 21.5 | 20.0 |
| UT MartinJan 30, 2026 · home | L 68–76 | 234 | 100.5 | 112.4 | 67.6 | 43.2 | 11.8 | 29.5 |
| Morehead StJan 24, 2026 · road | L 68–73 | 276 | 109.0 | 117.0 | 62.4 | 41.4 | 19.2 | 51.4 |
| So IndianaJan 23, 2026 · road | W 59–51 | 338 | 81.8 | 70.7 | 64.1 | 38.2 | 18.0 | 18.4 |
| BlackburnJan 18, 2026 · home | W 105–49 | Unrated | 149.4 | 69.7 | 70.3 | 75.8 | 15.6 | 45.5 |
| Little RockJan 16, 2026 · road | L 63–74 | 275 | 97.8 | 114.9 | 64.4 | 51.9 | 26.4 | 30.0 |
| W IllinoisJan 14, 2026 · home | W 57–55 | 362 | 86.1 | 83.0 | 66.2 | 38.2 | 18.1 | 25.7 |
| Tennessee StJan 10, 2026 · home | W 74–70 | 204 | 108.3 | 102.4 | 68.3 | 53.3 | 16.1 | 31.4 |
| Tennessee TechJan 9, 2026 · home | W 71–61 | 315 | 114.0 | 98.0 | 62.3 | 50.9 | 12.8 | 33.3 |
| UT MartinJan 3, 2026 · road | L 61–65 | 234 | 90.9 | 96.8 | 67.1 | 40.4 | 17.9 | 30.2 |
| SE MissouriJan 2, 2026 · road | L 59–68 | 243 | 84.3 | 97.2 | 70.0 | 39.8 | 17.1 | 16.1 |
| East WestDec 22, 2025 · home | W 110–56 | Unrated | 140.0 | 71.3 | 78.6 | 63.9 | 16.5 | 56.3 |
| SIUEDec 18, 2025 · home | W 76–72 | 231 | 106.5 | 100.9 | 63.4 | 55.3 | 22.4 | 31.3 |
| Iowa StateDec 14, 2025 · road | L 53–78 | 5 | 75.4 | 111.0 | 70.3 | 41.5 | 25.6 | 22.9 |
| E KentuckyDec 11, 2025 · home | L 59–68 | 256 | 93.8 | 108.1 | 62.9 | 44.3 | 19.1 | 24.2 |
| LindenwoodDec 7, 2025 · home | L 74–82 | 304 | 103.2 | 114.3 | 71.7 | 44.2 | 12.5 | 33.3 |
| PurdueNov 28, 2025 · road | L 62–109 | 9 | 86.2 | 151.6 | 71.9 | 51.9 | 23.6 | 13.3 |
| C ArkansasNov 26, 2025 · road | L 60–81 | 259 | 94.6 | 127.7 | 63.4 | 48.0 | 18.9 | 17.2 |
| TiffinNov 20, 2025 · home | W 62–50 | Unrated | 95.9 | 77.3 | 64.7 | 52.9 | 21.7 | 30.0 |
| KentuckyNov 15, 2025 · road | L 53–99 | 20 | 78.2 | 146.0 | 67.8 | 38.5 | 16.2 | 13.2 |
| Notre DameNov 12, 2025 · road | L 58–78 | 114 | 95.2 | 128.1 | 60.9 | 44.4 | 18.1 | 28.1 |
| NichollsNov 8, 2025 · home | W 65–57 | 235 | 93.1 | 81.7 | 69.8 | 41.3 | 22.9 | 32.4 |
| ValparaisoNov 5, 2025 · road | L 63–66 | 191 | 89.8 | 94.1 | 70.2 | 41.3 | 28.5 | 31.3 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kooper JacobiF | 33 | 33.3 | 11.1 | 6.4 | 1.8 | 45.9 | 20.8% | 33 | 1.5433 games | 10033 games |
| Meechie WhiteG | 33 | 30.4 | 10.5 | 3.7 | 3.1 | 55.4 | 19.3% | 33 | 1.7633 games | 9233 games |
| Zion FrusterG | 30 | 31.7 | 14.5 | 3.2 | 2.3 | 50.2 | 27.0% | 30 | 1.1730 games | 9930 games |
| Terry McMorrisF | 33 | 26.1 | 7.6 | 5.8 | 1.5 | 53.7 | 17.3% | 33 | 0.9433 games | 1233 games |
| Preston TurnerG | 31 | 20.8 | 7.7 | 1.7 | 0.9 | 63.0 | 19.0% | 31 | 0.5931 games | 9631 games |
| Nazareth FisherF | 29 | 15.2 | 4.1 | 4.1 | 0.4 | 58.2 | 15.8% | 29 | 0.3529 games | 029 games |
| Markus BlackwellG | 23 | 16.6 | 4.7 | 1.1 | 0.9 | 50.2 | 17.7% | 23 | 0.9523 games | 3923 games |
| Andre WashingtonG | 14 | 24.1 | 10.5 | 1.9 | 1.1 | 49.2 | 25.2% | 14 | 1.1414 games | 4914 games |
| Prince JohnsonF | 31 | 10.8 | 2.0 | 2.4 | 0.1 | 55.2 | 9.6% | 31 | 0.4031 games | 031 games |
| Malik OlafioyeG | 20 | 16.4 | 3.9 | 1.9 | 1.3 | 43.3 | 18.9% | 20 | 0.8720 games | 2020 games |
| Andrew AustinF | 24 | 11.4 | 2.4 | 0.8 | 0.9 | 43.8 | 15.5% | 24 | 1.4724 games | 4624 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 E Illinois?
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
12Same-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 | 9 | 3,664 | 3,664 | — | 100% | — |
| Forward | 5 | 3,011 | 3,011 | — | 100% | — |
| Center | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
0 listed players have no recognized source position. The workload denominator is the matched prior-production sample (6,675 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% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kooper Jacobi →F | Same programEastern Illinois Panthers | 33.3 | 11.1 | 45.9% |
| Meechie White →G | Same programEastern Illinois Panthers | 30.4 | 10.5 | 55.4% |
| Zion Fruster →G | Same programEastern Illinois Panthers | 31.7 | 14.5 | 50.2% |
| Terry McMorris →F | Same programEastern Illinois Panthers | 26.1 | 7.6 | 53.7% |
| Preston Turner →G | Same programEastern Illinois Panthers | 20.8 | 7.7 | 63.0% |
| Nazareth Fisher →F | Same programEastern Illinois Panthers | 15.2 | 4.1 | 58.2% |
| Markus Blackwell →G | Same programEastern Illinois Panthers | 16.6 | 4.7 | 50.2% |
| Andre Washington →G | Same programEastern Illinois Panthers | 24.1 | 10.5 | 49.2% |
| Prince Johnson →F | Same programEastern Illinois Panthers | 10.8 | 2.0 | 55.2% |
| Malik Olafioye →G | Same programEastern Illinois Panthers | 16.4 | 3.9 | 43.3% |
| Andrew Austin →F | Same programEastern Illinois Panthers | 11.4 | 2.4 | 43.8% |
| JT Elder →G | Same programEastern Illinois Panthers | 17.0 | 8.0 | 66.7% |
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…
SE Missouri vs E Illinois
69.2SE Missouri
67.2E Illinois
E Illinois win estimate48.5%
Model signalToss-up
Projected home margin-2.0
Projected total136.3
80% home-margin range-18.0 to 13.9
Estimated possessions68.6
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityAway 1.8 pts
E Illinois attack 46.4% · SE Missouri defense 50.8%SE Missouri attack 49.7% · E Illinois defense 52.3%
Ball securityAway 2.7 pts
E Illinois attack 17.9% · SE Missouri defense 17.8%SE Missouri attack 16.5% · E Illinois defense 19.2%
Second chancesHome 4.9 pts
E Illinois attack 27.8% · SE Missouri defense 28.7%SE Missouri attack 26.2% · E Illinois defense 32.0%
Free-throw pressureAway 9.8 pts
E Illinois attack 32.7% · SE Missouri defense 44.6%SE Missouri attack 34.7% · E Illinois defense 36.9%
Groniger Arena
Preseason baseline · roster changes are not model features.
No verified pregame market line imported. Check the forecast record →
Tennessee St vs E Illinois
73.1Tennessee St
69.4E Illinois
E Illinois win estimate44.0%
Model signalToss-up
Projected home margin-3.7
Projected total142.4
80% home-margin range-19.6 to 12.2
Estimated possessions69.4
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityAway 3.5 pts
E Illinois attack 46.4% · Tennessee St defense 51.7%Tennessee St attack 50.4% · E Illinois defense 52.3%
Ball securityAway 0.7 pts
E Illinois attack 17.9% · Tennessee St defense 18.2%Tennessee St attack 18.1% · E Illinois defense 19.2%
Second chancesAway 1.8 pts
E Illinois attack 27.8% · Tennessee St defense 30.5%Tennessee St attack 31.1% · E Illinois defense 32.0%
Free-throw pressureAway 7.5 pts
E Illinois attack 32.7% · Tennessee St defense 40.9%Tennessee St attack 36.1% · E Illinois defense 36.9%
Groniger Arena
Preseason baseline · roster changes are not model features.
No verified pregame market line imported. Check the forecast record →
E Illinois vs Morehead St
63.8E Illinois
70.5Morehead St
Morehead St win estimate70.9%
Model signalLean
Projected home margin6.7
Projected total134.3
80% home-margin range-9.3 to 22.6
Estimated possessions64.9
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityHome 1.8 pts
Morehead St attack 49.6% · E Illinois defense 52.3%E Illinois attack 46.4% · Morehead St defense 50.9%
Ball securityHome 4.2 pts
Morehead St attack 17.6% · E Illinois defense 19.2%E Illinois attack 17.9% · Morehead St defense 15.2%
Second chancesHome 2.0 pts
Morehead St attack 31.7% · E Illinois defense 32.0%E Illinois attack 27.8% · Morehead St defense 30.1%
Free-throw pressureHome 0.8 pts
Morehead St attack 35.7% · E Illinois defense 36.9%E Illinois attack 32.7% · Morehead St defense 34.7%
Ellis T. Johnson 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 →