A relative strength
Opponent effective FG%
45.0% · rank 4 of 366 · 35 games
What coverages and lineups account for the shot quality opponents receive?
← Program librarySource edition Sep 12, 2026
The program dossier / men’s basketball
Kansas
2025–26 performance, personnel and game context.
A starting point for 2026–27 preparation.
Independent preseason modelNo.17
+21.9 adjusted net
per 100 estimated possessions
24–112025–26 recorded finals
115.1Adjusted offense · 2026–27 baseline
93.2Adjusted defense · lower is better
68.8Model tempo · possessions / 40 min
Publisher lens / exact source team ID
A second read on Kansas.
Checking the attributed publisher rating…
01 / Both ends of the floor
The possession profile.
24–1135 recorded games · 35 paired efficiency samples · pace 68.3Mean opponent adj. net 15.4 · 35 rated opponents
Offense
Effective FG%
51.2%35 games · higher is betterRank 207 / 366 · 44th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent effective FG%
45.0%35 games · lower is betterRank 4 / 366 · 99th favorable percentileOffense
Turnover rate
15.6%35 games · lower is betterRank 115 / 366 · 69th favorable percentileDefense
Turnovers forced
13.8%35 games · higher is betterRank 342 / 366 · 7th favorable percentileOffense
Offensive rebound rate
29.2%35 games · higher is betterRank 249 / 366 · 32th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent offensive rebound rate
29.9%35 games · lower is betterRank 172 / 366 · 53th favorable percentileOffense
Free-throw attempt rate
32.2%35 games · higher is betterRank 251 / 366 · 32th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent free-throw attempt rate
27.4%35 games · lower is betterRank 31 / 366 · 92th favorable percentileShooting and ball-movement detail
| Metric | Observed rate | Games | Definition |
|---|---|---|---|
| Offensive efficiency | 109.2 | 35 | Points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Defensive efficiency | 100.3 | 35 | Opponent points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Two-point FG% | 50.9% | 35 | (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Opponent two-point FG% | 44.4% | 35 | Opponent (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Three-point FG% | 34.6% | 35 | 3PM / 3PA. |
| Opponent three-point FG% | 30.6% | 35 | Opponent 3PM / 3PA. |
| Three-point attempt share | 35.2% | 35 | 3PA / FGA; a style measure, not a quality grade. |
| Opponent three-point attempt share | 41.8% | 35 | Opponent 3PA / FGA; a style measure. |
| Free-throw accuracy | 76.7% | 35 | FTM / FTA. |
| Opponent free-throw accuracy | 68.6% | 35 | Opponent FTM / FTA; not attributed to defensive skill. |
| Assisted field-goal share | 52.3% | 35 | Assists / FGM; describes recorded ball movement. |
| Opponent assisted FG share | 47.3% | 35 | 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?
2,431 source possession rows across 35 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 free-throw attempt rate
27.4% · rank 31 of 366 · 35 games
Which defenders can protect the paint without surrendering free throws?
A closer look
Free-throw attempt rate
32.2% · rank 251 of 366 · 35 games
Who generates contact, and how do opponents keep them off the line?
A closer look
Turnovers forced
13.8% · rank 342 of 366 · 35 games
Which defensive actions produce takeaways, and what shots do they concede?
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 8 times in the selected window; Kansas won 6. 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 22, 2026 · neutral vs St John's · L 65–67 · offense 92.7 / defense 95.5
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 · 35 games
| Game / venue | Result | Current opponent rank | Off. eff. | Def. eff. | Pace | eFG% | TO% | ORB% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| St John'sMar 22, 2026 · neutral | L 65–67 | 14 | 92.7 | 95.5 | 70.2 | 49.1 | 22.8 | 26.5 |
| CA BaptistMar 21, 2026 · neutral | W 68–60 | 131 | 98.1 | 86.5 | 69.3 | 43.1 | 11.5 | 25.0 |
| HoustonMar 14, 2026 · neutral | L 47–69 | 2 | 79.3 | 116.4 | 59.3 | 30.7 | 13.5 | 31.9 |
| TCUMar 13, 2026 · neutral | W 78–73 | 48 | 104.6 | 97.9 | 74.6 | 41.4 | 13.4 | 28.2 |
| Kansas StMar 7, 2026 · home | W 104–85 | 83 | 133.2 | 108.9 | 78.1 | 66.9 | 15.4 | 36.4 |
| Arizona StMar 4, 2026 · road | L 60–70 | 84 | 82.8 | 96.7 | 72.4 | 34.0 | 23.5 | 46.3 |
| ArizonaFeb 28, 2026 · road | L 61–84 | 3 | 88.2 | 121.4 | 69.2 | 39.2 | 13.0 | 20.9 |
| HoustonFeb 24, 2026 · home | W 69–56 | 2 | 106.3 | 86.3 | 64.9 | 51.0 | 18.5 | 25.9 |
| CincinnatiFeb 21, 2026 · home | L 68–84 | 41 | 100.5 | 124.2 | 67.7 | 47.5 | 14.8 | 25.7 |
| Oklahoma StFeb 19, 2026 · road | W 81–69 | 88 | 115.2 | 98.2 | 70.3 | 54.9 | 17.1 | 30.3 |
| Iowa StateFeb 14, 2026 · road | L 56–74 | 5 | 88.7 | 117.3 | 63.1 | 43.1 | 20.6 | 30.3 |
| ArizonaFeb 10, 2026 · home | W 82–78 | 3 | 110.4 | 105.0 | 74.3 | 44.2 | 14.8 | 38.6 |
| UtahFeb 7, 2026 · home | W 71–59 | 93 | 105.8 | 87.9 | 67.1 | 52.7 | 14.9 | 21.9 |
| Texas TechFeb 3, 2026 · road | W 64–61 | 16 | 92.4 | 88.1 | 69.3 | 50.9 | 21.7 | 16.1 |
| BYUJan 31, 2026 · home | W 90–82 | 19 | 130.0 | 118.4 | 69.2 | 67.0 | 8.7 | 13.8 |
| Kansas StJan 25, 2026 · road | W 86–62 | 83 | 132.3 | 95.3 | 65.0 | 56.9 | 15.4 | 44.4 |
| ColoradoJan 21, 2026 · road | W 75–69 | 69 | 111.1 | 102.2 | 67.5 | 53.8 | 17.8 | 30.0 |
| BaylorJan 17, 2026 · home | W 80–62 | 33 | 121.3 | 94.0 | 66.0 | 54.8 | 6.1 | 21.2 |
| Iowa StateJan 14, 2026 · home | W 84–63 | 5 | 129.3 | 97.0 | 65.0 | 60.7 | 13.9 | 36.7 |
| West VirginiaJan 10, 2026 · road | L 75–86 | 52 | 112.5 | 129.0 | 66.7 | 49.2 | 9.0 | 27.0 |
| TCUJan 7, 2026 · home | W 104–100 | 48 | 120.6 | 116.0 | 76.6 | 58.7 | 15.1 | 25.0 |
| UCFJan 3, 2026 · road | L 75–81 | 56 | 107.7 | 116.3 | 69.6 | 50.0 | 17.2 | 30.6 |
| DavidsonDec 23, 2025 · home | W 90–61 | 121 | 122.3 | 82.9 | 73.6 | 66.4 | 20.4 | 29.6 |
| TowsonDec 17, 2025 · home | W 73–49 | 150 | 114.6 | 77.0 | 63.7 | 53.3 | 14.1 | 34.3 |
| NC StateDec 13, 2025 · road | W 77–76 | 45 | 102.8 | 101.4 | 66.6 | 50.7 | 10.7 | 23.3 |
| MissouriDec 7, 2025 · neutral | W 80–60 | 49 | 121.8 | 91.4 | 65.7 | 53.5 | 13.7 | 38.7 |
| UConnDec 3, 2025 · home | L 56–61 | 10 | 89.8 | 97.8 | 62.4 | 40.2 | 16.0 | 25.0 |
| TennesseeNov 27, 2025 · neutral | W 81–76 | 11 | 116.8 | 109.6 | 69.4 | 48.2 | 13.0 | 29.4 |
| SyracuseNov 25, 2025 · neutral | W 71–60 | 102 | 108.9 | 92.0 | 65.2 | 49.1 | 23.0 | 41.9 |
| Notre DameNov 24, 2025 · neutral | W 71–61 | 114 | 108.1 | 92.9 | 65.7 | 51.7 | 13.7 | 29.4 |
| DukeNov 19, 2025 · neutral | L 66–78 | 1 | 100.0 | 118.2 | 66.0 | 46.7 | 12.1 | 22.2 |
| PrincetonNov 15, 2025 · home | W 76–57 | 184 | 107.1 | 80.3 | 70.9 | 51.9 | 19.7 | 28.1 |
| Texas A&M-CCNov 12, 2025 · home | W 77–46 | 174 | 108.0 | 64.5 | 71.3 | 62.0 | 25.2 | 25.9 |
| North CarolinaNov 8, 2025 · road | L 74–87 | 22 | 104.8 | 123.2 | 70.6 | 55.2 | 19.8 | 23.3 |
| Green BayNov 4, 2025 · home | W 94–51 | 284 | 145.8 | 79.1 | 64.5 | 65.5 | 4.7 | 32.1 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Melvin Council Jr.G | 35 | 34.8 | 12.7 | 5.0 | 5.1 | 46.5 | 22.8% | 35 | 2.6835 games | 12035 games |
| Flory BidungaF | 35 | 31.6 | 13.3 | 9.0 | 1.5 | 64.7 | 19.1% | 35 | 0.9635 games | 235 games |
| Tre WhiteG | 35 | 31.3 | 13.5 | 6.7 | 1.8 | 60.0 | 21.3% | 35 | 0.9735 games | 13935 games |
| Bryson TillerF | 35 | 25.9 | 7.9 | 6.1 | 1.0 | 51.8 | 18.6% | 35 | 0.5635 games | 5235 games |
| Darryn PetersonG | 24 | 29.0 | 20.2 | 4.2 | 1.6 | 57.8 | 33.5% | 24 | 1.0024 games | 16524 games |
| Jamari McDowellG | 35 | 17.3 | 3.3 | 1.6 | 1.1 | 52.5 | 10.9% | 35 | 2.2935 games | 8635 games |
| Elmarko JacksonG | 34 | 17.7 | 4.8 | 1.8 | 1.4 | 52.6 | 16.0% | 34 | 1.4834 games | 4334 games |
| Kohl RosarioG | 29 | 11.6 | 3.4 | 1.3 | 0.4 | 54.0 | 15.6% | 29 | 1.0829 games | 6329 games |
| Jayden DawsonG | 24 | 9.6 | 2.1 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 45.2 | 13.1% | 24 | 7.0024 games | 4324 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 Kansas?
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.
13Source-listed players
12Same-program prior records
0Different-program records
57%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 | 1,842 | 1,842 | — | 100% | — |
| Forward | 4 | 2,091 | 2,091 | — | 100% | — |
| Center | 1 | 107 | 107 | — | 100% | — |
0 listed players have no recognized source position. The workload denominator is the matched prior-production sample (4,040 minutes).
Dated school publications
11 announced additions
| Player | Evidence | Prior program | Prior MPG | Prior PPG | Latest publication |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atticus RichmondPrep addition | Addition announced ↗Kansas announced Atticus Richmond as a 2026–27 addition. | Newman School | — | — | May 12, 20261 dated record |
| Dennis Parker Jr. →College transfer | Addition announced ↗Kansas announced Dennis Parker Jr. as a 2026–27 addition. | RadfordRadford · 2025–26 | 29.2 | 18.2 | May 11, 20261 dated record |
| Christian Reeves →College transfer | Addition announced ↗Kansas announced Christian Reeves as a 2026–27 addition. | College of CharlestonCharleston · 2025–26 | 21.4 | 11.1 | May 1, 20261 dated record |
| Davion AdkinsPrep addition | Addition announced ↗Kansas identified Davion Adkins among its previously signed freshmen in the May 1 update. | Prep addition | — | — | May 1, 20261 dated record |
| Grant MordiniPrep addition | Addition announced ↗Kansas announced Grant Mordini as a 2026–27 addition. | Avon Old Farms School | — | — | May 1, 20261 dated record |
| Luke BarnettPrep addition | Addition announced ↗Kansas identified Luke Barnett among its previously signed freshmen in the May 1 update. | Prep addition | — | — | May 1, 20261 dated record |
| Taylen KinneyPrep addition | Addition announced ↗Kansas identified Taylen Kinney among its previously signed freshmen in the May 1 update. | Prep addition | — | — | May 1, 20261 dated record |
| Trent PerryPrep addition | Addition announced ↗Kansas identified Trent Perry among its previously signed freshmen in the May 1 update. | Prep addition | — | — | May 1, 20261 dated record |
| Tyran StokesPrep addition | Addition announced ↗Kansas announced Tyran Stokes as a 2026–27 addition. | Rainier Beach High School | — | — | Apr 29, 20261 dated record |
| Leroy Blyden Jr. →College transfer | Addition announced ↗Kansas announced Leroy Blyden Jr. as a 2026–27 addition. | ToledoToledo · 2025–26 | 33.4 | 16.4 | Apr 22, 20261 dated record |
| Keanu Dawes →College transfer | Addition announced ↗Kansas announced Keanu Dawes as a 2026–27 addition. | UtahUtah · 2025–26 | 30.7 | 12.5 | Apr 21, 20261 dated record |
Roster observation
Who is listed in the source release?
13 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% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flory Bidunga →F | Same programKansas Jayhawks | 31.6 | 13.3 | 64.7% |
| Bryson Tiller →F | Same programKansas Jayhawks | 25.9 | 7.9 | 51.8% |
| Jamari McDowell →G | Same programKansas Jayhawks | 17.3 | 3.3 | 52.5% |
| Elmarko Jackson →G | Same programKansas Jayhawks | 17.7 | 4.8 | 52.6% |
| Kohl Rosario →G | Same programKansas Jayhawks | 11.6 | 3.4 | 54.0% |
| Jayden Dawson →G | Same programKansas Jayhawks | 9.6 | 2.1 | 45.2% |
| Paul Mbiya →C | Same programKansas Jayhawks | 5.1 | 1.2 | 61.2% |
| Samis Calderon →F | Same programKansas Jayhawks | 4.3 | 0.4 | 33.9% |
| Nginyu Ngala →G | Same programKansas Jayhawks | 3.5 | 1.5 | 57.6% |
| Wilder Evers →G | Same programKansas Jayhawks | 3.2 | 1.3 | 80.0% |
| Justin Cross →F | Same programKansas Jayhawks | 2.6 | 0.0 | 0.0% |
| Will Thengvall →G | Same programKansas Jayhawks | 1.6 | 0.0 | 0.0% |
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…
Fordham vs Kansas
59.6Fordham
79.2Kansas
Kansas win estimate91.0%
Model signalStrong lean
Projected home margin19.6
Projected total138.7
80% home-margin range3.7 to 35.5
Estimated possessions68.3
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityAway 0.7 pts
Kansas attack 53.9% · Fordham defense 50.9%Fordham attack 49.0% · Kansas defense 45.2%
Ball securityHome 3.2 pts
Kansas attack 15.7% · Fordham defense 17.3%Fordham attack 17.9% · Kansas defense 16.3%
Second chancesAway 3.5 pts
Kansas attack 30.4% · Fordham defense 28.2%Fordham attack 32.0% · Kansas defense 26.3%
Free-throw pressureAway 7.6 pts
Kansas attack 32.2% · Fordham defense 36.6%Fordham attack 32.3% · Kansas defense 29.2%
Allen Fieldhouse
Preseason baseline · roster changes are not model features.
No verified pregame market line imported. Check the forecast record →
MTSU vs Kansas
61.3MTSU
79.4Kansas
Kansas win estimate89.5%
Model signalStrong lean
Projected home margin18.1
Projected total140.7
80% home-margin range2.2 to 34.0
Estimated possessions67.9
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityAway 2.5 pts
Kansas attack 53.9% · MTSU defense 50.6%MTSU attack 51.0% · Kansas defense 45.2%
Ball securityHome 1.7 pts
Kansas attack 15.7% · MTSU defense 16.4%MTSU attack 17.3% · Kansas defense 16.3%
Second chancesAway 1.5 pts
Kansas attack 30.4% · MTSU defense 27.9%MTSU attack 30.3% · Kansas defense 26.3%
Free-throw pressureAway 4.9 pts
Kansas attack 32.2% · MTSU defense 33.9%MTSU attack 32.3% · Kansas defense 29.2%
Allen Fieldhouse
Preseason baseline · roster changes are not model features.
No verified pregame market line imported. Check the forecast record →
Kentucky vs Kansas
75.0Kentucky
75.5Kansas
Kansas win estimate55.6%
Model signalToss-up
Projected home margin0.6
Projected total150.5
80% home-margin range-15.4 to 16.5
Estimated possessions70.5
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityAway 4.5 pts
Kansas attack 53.9% · Kentucky defense 48.1%Kentucky attack 55.6% · Kansas defense 45.2%
Ball securityAway 0.3 pts
Kansas attack 15.7% · Kentucky defense 16.2%Kentucky attack 15.4% · Kansas defense 16.3%
Second chancesAway 1.7 pts
Kansas attack 30.4% · Kentucky defense 26.4%Kentucky attack 32.1% · Kansas defense 26.3%
Free-throw pressureAway 8.4 pts
Kansas attack 32.2% · Kentucky defense 33.5%Kentucky attack 36.3% · Kansas defense 29.2%
United 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 →