A relative strength
Free-throw attempt rate
37.4% · rank 106 of 366 · 33 games
Who generates contact, and how do opponents keep them off the line?
← Program librarySource edition Sep 12, 2026
The program dossier / men’s basketball
Jackson St
2025–26 performance, personnel and game context.
A starting point for 2026–27 preparation.
Independent preseason modelNo.345
-15.5 adjusted net
per 100 estimated possessions
12–212025–26 recorded finals
98.5Adjusted offense · 2026–27 baseline
114.0Adjusted defense · lower is better
69.8Model tempo · possessions / 40 min
Publisher lens / exact source team ID
A second read on Jackson St.
Checking the attributed publisher rating…
01 / Both ends of the floor
The possession profile.
12–2133 recorded games · 33 paired efficiency samples · pace 71.0Mean opponent adj. net -5.9 · 33 rated opponents
Offense
Effective FG%
45.7%33 games · higher is betterRank 358 / 366 · 2th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent effective FG%
53.0%33 games · lower is betterRank 288 / 366 · 21th favorable percentileOffense
Turnover rate
19.4%33 games · lower is betterRank 342 / 366 · 7th favorable percentileDefense
Turnovers forced
16.5%33 games · higher is betterRank 205 / 366 · 44th favorable percentileOffense
Offensive rebound rate
29.7%33 games · higher is betterRank 227 / 366 · 38th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent offensive rebound rate
37.2%33 games · lower is betterRank 363 / 366 · 1th favorable percentileOffense
Free-throw attempt rate
37.4%33 games · higher is betterRank 106 / 366 · 71th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent free-throw attempt rate
41.9%33 games · lower is betterRank 332 / 366 · 9th favorable percentileShooting and ball-movement detail
| Metric | Observed rate | Games | Definition |
|---|---|---|---|
| Offensive efficiency | 98.1 | 33 | Points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Defensive efficiency | 117.0 | 33 | Opponent points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Two-point FG% | 44.6% | 33 | (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Opponent two-point FG% | 53.5% | 33 | Opponent (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Three-point FG% | 31.4% | 33 | 3PM / 3PA. |
| Opponent three-point FG% | 34.8% | 33 | Opponent 3PM / 3PA. |
| Three-point attempt share | 43.3% | 33 | 3PA / FGA; a style measure, not a quality grade. |
| Opponent three-point attempt share | 39.7% | 33 | Opponent 3PA / FGA; a style measure. |
| Free-throw accuracy | 75.8% | 33 | FTM / FTA. |
| Opponent free-throw accuracy | 74.7% | 33 | Opponent FTM / FTA; not attributed to defensive skill. |
| Assisted field-goal share | 45.8% | 33 | Assists / FGM; describes recorded ball movement. |
| Opponent assisted FG share | 60.9% | 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?
2,366 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
Turnovers forced
16.5% · rank 205 of 366 · 33 games
Which defensive actions produce takeaways, and what shots do they concede?
A closer look
Effective FG%
45.7% · rank 358 of 366 · 33 games
Which actions create the team's efficient looks, and which personnel can reproduce them?
A closer look
Opponent offensive rebound rate
37.2% · rank 363 of 366 · 33 games
Which matchups demand an extra box-out assignment?
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; Jackson St won 7. 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 12, 2026 · neutral vs Florida A&M · L 60–70 · offense 85.7 / defense 100.0
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% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Florida A&MMar 12, 2026 · neutral | L 60–70 | 335 | 85.7 | 100.0 | 70.0 | 41.1 | 28.6 | 41.0 |
| GramblingMar 11, 2026 · neutral | W 68–65 | 307 | 99.1 | 94.7 | 68.6 | 43.2 | 18.9 | 39.0 |
| Miss Valley StMar 6, 2026 · home | W 85–77 | 365 | 128.8 | 116.7 | 66.0 | 45.9 | 10.6 | 40.5 |
| AR-Pine BluffMar 4, 2026 · home | W 81–78 | 357 | 116.8 | 112.5 | 69.3 | 46.7 | 14.4 | 41.0 |
| Texas SouthernFeb 28, 2026 · road | L 57–82 | 320 | 80.3 | 115.5 | 71.0 | 32.6 | 15.5 | 32.7 |
| Prairie ViewFeb 27, 2026 · road | L 76–85 | 336 | 102.1 | 114.2 | 66.2 | 46.8 | 21.5 | 38.5 |
| Alcorn StFeb 21, 2026 · road | L 65–83 | 353 | 90.7 | 115.8 | 71.7 | 42.6 | 25.1 | 32.4 |
| BethuneFeb 17, 2026 · home | W 91–86 | 301 | 118.0 | 111.5 | 77.2 | 57.1 | 16.9 | 29.4 |
| Florida A&MFeb 14, 2026 · home | W 80–60 | 335 | 115.2 | 86.4 | 69.4 | 52.4 | 17.3 | 38.2 |
| AR-Pine BluffFeb 9, 2026 · road | L 63–84 | 357 | 96.1 | 128.1 | 65.6 | 42.1 | 18.3 | 37.2 |
| Miss Valley StFeb 7, 2026 · road | W 97–81 | 365 | 128.5 | 107.3 | 75.5 | 50.7 | 19.9 | 53.5 |
| SouthernFeb 3, 2026 · home | L 91–96 | 282 | 113.1 | 119.3 | 71.5 | 51.5 | 14.9 | 27.5 |
| GramblingJan 31, 2026 · home | L 66–69 | 307 | 100.1 | 104.6 | 66.0 | 44.0 | 18.2 | 25.7 |
| Florida A&MJan 27, 2026 · road | W 66–65 | 335 | 106.4 | 104.8 | 62.0 | 49.0 | 17.7 | 38.2 |
| BethuneJan 24, 2026 · road | L 48–85 | 301 | 65.2 | 115.5 | 73.6 | 29.1 | 17.7 | 21.6 |
| Texas SouthernJan 20, 2026 · home | W 94–89 | 320 | 129.0 | 122.2 | 72.9 | 60.3 | 13.7 | 26.7 |
| Prairie ViewJan 17, 2026 · home | W 82–78 | 336 | 110.7 | 105.3 | 74.1 | 53.1 | 23.0 | 42.1 |
| Alabama A&MJan 13, 2026 · road | L 91–100 | 346 | 111.6 | 122.6 | 81.6 | 53.2 | 12.3 | 14.6 |
| Alabama StJan 10, 2026 · road | W 75–64 | 322 | 99.2 | 84.7 | 75.6 | 40.5 | 19.8 | 33.3 |
| Alcorn StJan 3, 2026 · home | W 89–86 | 353 | 126.9 | 122.6 | 70.1 | 61.8 | 14.3 | 24.1 |
| TCUDec 30, 2025 · road | L 64–115 | 48 | 86.6 | 155.6 | 73.9 | 45.8 | 23.0 | 26.3 |
| Norfolk StDec 20, 2025 · neutral | L 72–82 | 252 | 98.6 | 112.3 | 73.0 | 49.2 | 21.9 | 28.9 |
| HamptonDec 18, 2025 · neutral | L 77–84 | 288 | 107.4 | 117.2 | 71.7 | 55.2 | 16.7 | 18.8 |
| NorthwesternDec 13, 2025 · road | L 53–93 | 53 | 72.9 | 127.9 | 72.7 | 33.9 | 17.9 | 19.0 |
| HoustonDec 11, 2025 · road | L 38–80 | 2 | 59.1 | 124.5 | 64.3 | 39.8 | 38.9 | 22.6 |
| Kennesaw StDec 3, 2025 · road | L 73–88 | 159 | 100.5 | 121.1 | 72.7 | 40.5 | 19.3 | 28.9 |
| LouisianaNov 29, 2025 · road | W 51–45 | 297 | 82.3 | 72.6 | 62.0 | 42.7 | 21.0 | 22.9 |
| WinthropNov 24, 2025 · home | L 62–80 | 153 | 96.5 | 124.5 | 64.3 | 50.9 | 20.2 | 24.2 |
| ArkansasNov 22, 2025 · road | L 61–115 | 23 | 80.1 | 151.0 | 76.2 | 41.4 | 26.3 | 29.3 |
| AuburnNov 20, 2025 · road | L 66–112 | 15 | 87.4 | 148.3 | 75.5 | 46.4 | 29.1 | 33.3 |
| Louisiana TechNov 16, 2025 · road | L 51–68 | 156 | 74.6 | 99.4 | 68.4 | 33.9 | 20.5 | 22.7 |
| LouisvilleNov 7, 2025 · road | L 70–106 | 32 | 90.8 | 137.5 | 77.1 | 48.4 | 15.6 | 17.1 |
| IllinoisNov 4, 2025 · road | L 55–113 | 7 | 72.8 | 149.6 | 75.5 | 36.3 | 14.6 | 9.1 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jayme Mitchell Jr.G | 32 | 32.8 | 14.5 | 4.9 | 0.9 | 53.1 | 23.7% | 32 | 0.4032 games | 19032 games |
| Daeshun RuffinG | 28 | 33.5 | 23.3 | 2.8 | 5.3 | 55.3 | 36.2% | 28 | 1.4228 games | 13928 games |
| Dorian McMillianG | 28 | 29.5 | 11.9 | 4.4 | 1.4 | 49.9 | 23.0% | 28 | 0.6428 games | 17428 games |
| Devin ReeF | 33 | 20.8 | 5.4 | 3.0 | 0.7 | 47.8 | 15.4% | 33 | 0.8033 games | 9833 games |
| Tamarion HooverG | 30 | 19.8 | 5.9 | 3.1 | 0.3 | 55.2 | 14.2% | 30 | 0.6030 games | 11830 games |
| Delyle WilliamsG | 31 | 17.2 | 2.9 | 2.4 | 1.3 | 38.4 | 13.8% | 31 | 1.0831 games | 4331 games |
| Raevon ThomasF | 25 | 17.6 | 3.3 | 3.3 | 0.3 | 59.4 | 9.9% | 25 | 0.3325 games | 1825 games |
| Dionjahe ThomasF | 23 | 18.4 | 5.1 | 5.3 | 0.4 | 50.8 | 16.2% | 23 | 0.3723 games | 323 games |
| Jalen TatumG | 11 | 26.5 | 7.7 | 2.6 | 1.8 | 47.4 | 17.7% | 11 | 1.1111 games | 1211 games |
| Kobe ButlerF | 27 | 10.4 | 1.8 | 1.8 | 0.1 | 44.7 | 11.1% | 27 | 0.2727 games | 327 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 Jackson 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.
16Source-listed players
15Same-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 | 4,409 | 4,409 | — | 100% | — |
| Forward | 6 | 2,046 | 2,046 | — | 100% | — |
| Center | 1 | 195 | 195 | — | 100% | — |
0 listed players have no recognized source position. The workload denominator is the matched prior-production sample (6,650 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?
16 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% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jayme Mitchell Jr. →G | Same programJackson State Tigers | 32.8 | 14.5 | 53.1% |
| Daeshun Ruffin →G | Same programJackson State Tigers | 33.5 | 23.3 | 55.3% |
| Dorian McMillian →G | Same programJackson State Tigers | 29.5 | 11.9 | 49.9% |
| Devin Ree →F | Same programJackson State Tigers | 20.8 | 5.4 | 47.8% |
| Tamarion Hoover →G | Same programJackson State Tigers | 19.8 | 5.9 | 55.2% |
| Delyle Williams →G | Same programJackson State Tigers | 17.2 | 2.9 | 38.4% |
| Raevon Thomas →F | Same programJackson State Tigers | 17.6 | 3.3 | 59.4% |
| Dionjahe Thomas →F | Same programJackson State Tigers | 18.4 | 5.1 | 50.8% |
| Jalen Tatum →G | Same programJackson State Tigers | 26.5 | 7.7 | 47.4% |
| Kobe Butler →F | Same programJackson State Tigers | 10.4 | 1.8 | 44.7% |
| Ebo Wilson →C | Same programJackson State Tigers | 10.8 | 0.7 | 26.8% |
| Mike Williams →G | Same programJackson State Tigers | 19.9 | 5.5 | 36.9% |
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…
Jackson St vs Mississippi St
63.9Jackson St
86.2Mississippi St
Mississippi St win estimate93.1%
Model signalStrong lean
Projected home margin22.2
Projected total150.1
80% home-margin range6.3 to 38.2
Estimated possessions70.7
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityHome 1.3 pts
Mississippi St attack 52.6% · Jackson St defense 53.2%Jackson St attack 47.0% · Mississippi St defense 48.9%
Ball securityHome 2.0 pts
Mississippi St attack 16.5% · Jackson St defense 17.1%Jackson St attack 18.6% · Mississippi St defense 17.2%
Second chancesAway 2.1 pts
Mississippi St attack 32.4% · Jackson St defense 32.7%Jackson St attack 29.6% · Mississippi St defense 27.7%
Free-throw pressureAway 6.2 pts
Mississippi St attack 32.9% · Jackson St defense 36.5%Jackson St attack 34.6% · Mississippi St defense 32.0%
Humphrey Coliseum
Preseason baseline · roster changes are not model features.
No verified pregame market line imported. Check the forecast record →
Jackson St vs Baylor
63.5Jackson St
90.0Baylor
Baylor win estimate95.6%
Model signalStrong lean
Projected home margin26.5
Projected total153.4
80% home-margin range10.6 to 42.5
Estimated possessions69.0
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityHome 5.3 pts
Baylor attack 54.7% · Jackson St defense 53.2%Jackson St attack 47.0% · Baylor defense 50.9%
Ball securityHome 2.4 pts
Baylor attack 15.7% · Jackson St defense 17.1%Jackson St attack 18.6% · Baylor defense 17.6%
Second chancesHome 1.8 pts
Baylor attack 36.1% · Jackson St defense 32.7%Jackson St attack 29.6% · Baylor defense 27.9%
Free-throw pressureAway 3.2 pts
Baylor attack 35.5% · Jackson St defense 36.5%Jackson St attack 34.6% · Baylor defense 32.3%
Foster Pavilion
Preseason baseline · roster changes are not model features.
No verified pregame market line imported. Check the forecast record →
Jackson St vs Texas
62.9Jackson St
89.6Texas
Texas win estimate95.7%
Model signalStrong lean
Projected home margin26.8
Projected total152.5
80% home-margin range10.8 to 42.7
Estimated possessions69.6
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityHome 3.0 pts
Texas attack 54.5% · Jackson St defense 53.2%Jackson St attack 47.0% · Texas defense 48.8%
Ball securityHome 3.9 pts
Texas attack 15.2% · Jackson St defense 17.1%Jackson St attack 18.6% · Texas defense 16.5%
Second chancesAway 3.2 pts
Texas attack 32.3% · Jackson St defense 32.7%Jackson St attack 29.6% · Texas defense 26.7%
Free-throw pressureHome 5.1 pts
Texas attack 38.6% · Jackson St defense 36.5%Jackson St attack 34.6% · Texas defense 37.6%
Moody Center
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 →