A relative strength
Turnover rate
14.4% · rank 37 of 366 · 34 games
Where do turnovers occur under pressure, and who can relieve that pressure?
← Program librarySource edition Sep 12, 2026
The program dossier / men’s basketball
Mercyhurst
2025–26 performance, personnel and game context.
A starting point for 2026–27 preparation.
Independent preseason modelNo.305
-10.9 adjusted net
per 100 estimated possessions
17–172025–26 recorded finals
100.4Adjusted offense · 2026–27 baseline
111.3Adjusted defense · lower is better
65.7Model tempo · possessions / 40 min
Publisher lens / exact source team ID
A second read on Mercyhurst.
Checking the attributed publisher rating…
01 / Both ends of the floor
The possession profile.
17–1734 recorded games · 34 paired efficiency samples · pace 65.0Mean opponent adj. net -9.3 · 32 rated opponents
Offense
Effective FG%
50.4%34 games · higher is betterRank 253 / 366 · 31th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent effective FG%
49.5%34 games · lower is betterRank 101 / 366 · 73th favorable percentileOffense
Turnover rate
14.4%34 games · lower is betterRank 37 / 366 · 90th favorable percentileDefense
Turnovers forced
19.2%34 games · higher is betterRank 56 / 366 · 85th favorable percentileOffense
Offensive rebound rate
26.7%34 games · higher is betterRank 323 / 366 · 12th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent offensive rebound rate
29.0%34 games · lower is betterRank 135 / 366 · 63th favorable percentileOffense
Free-throw attempt rate
24.9%34 games · higher is betterRank 364 / 366 · 1th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent free-throw attempt rate
41.5%34 games · lower is betterRank 329 / 366 · 10th favorable percentileShooting and ball-movement detail
| Metric | Observed rate | Games | Definition |
|---|---|---|---|
| Offensive efficiency | 105.2 | 34 | Points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Defensive efficiency | 102.2 | 34 | Opponent points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Two-point FG% | 51.0% | 34 | (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Opponent two-point FG% | 50.1% | 34 | Opponent (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Three-point FG% | 32.7% | 34 | 3PM / 3PA. |
| Opponent three-point FG% | 32.2% | 34 | Opponent 3PM / 3PA. |
| Three-point attempt share | 31.5% | 34 | 3PA / FGA; a style measure, not a quality grade. |
| Opponent three-point attempt share | 34.1% | 34 | Opponent 3PA / FGA; a style measure. |
| Free-throw accuracy | 72.5% | 34 | FTM / FTA. |
| Opponent free-throw accuracy | 69.0% | 34 | Opponent FTM / FTA; not attributed to defensive skill. |
| Assisted field-goal share | 55.5% | 34 | Assists / FGM; describes recorded ball movement. |
| Opponent assisted FG share | 51.6% | 34 | 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?
2,254 source possession rows across 34 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
19.2% · rank 56 of 366 · 34 games
Which defensive actions produce takeaways, and what shots do they concede?
A closer look
Opponent free-throw attempt rate
41.5% · rank 329 of 366 · 34 games
Which defenders can protect the paint without surrendering free throws?
A closer look
Free-throw attempt rate
24.9% · rank 364 of 366 · 34 games
Who generates contact, and how do opponents keep them off the line?
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 14 times in the selected window; Mercyhurst 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 10, 2026 · road vs Long Island · L 70–79 · offense 105.7 / defense 119.3
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 · 34 games
| Game / venue | Result | Current opponent rank | Off. eff. | Def. eff. | Pace | eFG% | TO% | ORB% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long IslandMar 10, 2026 · road | L 70–79 | 269 | 105.7 | 119.3 | 66.2 | 52.5 | 12.1 | 17.6 |
| StonehillMar 7, 2026 · home | W 56–51 | 341 | 85.4 | 77.8 | 65.6 | 39.5 | 13.7 | 20.5 |
| FDUMar 5, 2026 · home | W 70–61 | 328 | 108.0 | 94.2 | 64.8 | 57.1 | 17.0 | 16.0 |
| StonehillFeb 28, 2026 · road | W 75–72 | 341 | 97.9 | 94.0 | 68.1 | 39.4 | 7.8 | 26.5 |
| C ConnecticutFeb 27, 2026 · road | L 78–80 | 260 | 114.7 | 117.7 | 68.0 | 53.2 | 10.3 | 22.6 |
| Long IslandFeb 21, 2026 · home | W 91–83 | 269 | 130.5 | 119.0 | 69.7 | 58.7 | 11.5 | 35.5 |
| WagnerFeb 20, 2026 · home | L 80–83 | 313 | 107.3 | 111.4 | 66.3 | 50.0 | 12.1 | 28.2 |
| Saint FrancisFeb 14, 2026 · road | W 94–79 | 356 | 137.0 | 115.1 | 68.6 | 67.2 | 13.1 | 33.3 |
| Le MoyneFeb 13, 2026 · road | L 57–58 | 316 | 82.7 | 84.2 | 68.9 | 37.5 | 8.7 | 18.6 |
| FDUFeb 7, 2026 · road | L 52–55 | 328 | 95.9 | 101.4 | 54.3 | 47.0 | 11.1 | 20.0 |
| Saint FrancisFeb 6, 2026 · home | W 98–89 | 356 | 126.7 | 115.1 | 68.8 | 54.4 | 16.8 | 48.7 |
| Chicago StJan 31, 2026 · road | L 74–78 | 360 | 111.4 | 117.4 | 66.5 | 53.3 | 15.0 | 32.4 |
| New HavenJan 30, 2026 · home | W 70–51 | 332 | 114.7 | 83.6 | 61.0 | 47.5 | 6.6 | 27.0 |
| Chicago StJan 25, 2026 · home | W 61–59 | 360 | 105.6 | 102.1 | 57.8 | 56.0 | 20.8 | 24.1 |
| New HavenJan 23, 2026 · road | W 61–57 | 332 | 103.9 | 97.1 | 58.7 | 55.1 | 15.3 | 12.0 |
| C ConnecticutJan 19, 2026 · home | W 79–61 | 260 | 128.4 | 99.2 | 61.5 | 62.5 | 13.0 | 33.3 |
| StonehillJan 17, 2026 · home | L 57–62 | 341 | 81.7 | 88.8 | 62.0 | 36.8 | 12.9 | 28.3 |
| WagnerJan 10, 2026 · road | W 70–69 | 313 | 108.0 | 106.5 | 64.8 | 54.1 | 7.7 | 3.7 |
| Long IslandJan 9, 2026 · road | L 58–60 | 269 | 96.4 | 99.7 | 60.2 | 49.1 | 16.6 | 28.1 |
| Le MoyneJan 4, 2026 · home | W 74–60 | 316 | 115.9 | 94.0 | 63.8 | 50.9 | 14.1 | 38.2 |
| FDUJan 3, 2026 · home | L 67–74 | 328 | 104.6 | 115.5 | 64.1 | 47.1 | 18.7 | 25.8 |
| BinghamtonDec 20, 2025 · home | W 82–61 | 352 | 117.6 | 87.5 | 69.7 | 54.5 | 10.0 | 25.7 |
| SyracuseDec 18, 2025 · road | L 62–76 | 102 | 87.1 | 106.8 | 71.2 | 44.4 | 21.1 | 29.7 |
| DavidsonDec 13, 2025 · road | L 47–80 | 121 | 79.9 | 136.0 | 58.8 | 44.4 | 17.0 | 9.4 |
| Bethany (WV)Dec 7, 2025 · home | W 80–51 | Unrated | 118.8 | 75.7 | 67.4 | 58.1 | 13.4 | 35.3 |
| LafayetteDec 6, 2025 · road | L 71–79 | 319 | 111.5 | 124.0 | 63.7 | 47.8 | 9.4 | 36.8 |
| West VirginiaNov 30, 2025 · road | L 38–70 | 52 | 62.7 | 115.4 | 60.7 | 38.5 | 24.7 | 16.7 |
| MarshallNov 24, 2025 · road | L 60–69 | 172 | 95.1 | 109.4 | 63.1 | 42.5 | 15.8 | 31.7 |
| Miami OHNov 21, 2025 · road | L 71–76 | 119 | 108.5 | 116.1 | 65.4 | 55.4 | 18.3 | 31.3 |
| Morgan StNov 15, 2025 · home | W 86–72 | 351 | 127.1 | 106.4 | 67.7 | 60.5 | 16.3 | 40.6 |
| CanisiusNov 13, 2025 · road | L 55–58 | 354 | 89.3 | 94.2 | 61.6 | 46.2 | 17.9 | 20.7 |
| PSU New KensNov 8, 2025 · home | W 94–43 | Unrated | 125.6 | 57.5 | 74.8 | 69.8 | 17.4 | 28.6 |
| Loyola ChicagoNov 7, 2025 · road | W 73–65 | 202 | 108.2 | 96.4 | 67.4 | 52.8 | 17.8 | 31.0 |
| NorthwesternNov 4, 2025 · road | L 47–70 | 53 | 69.5 | 103.5 | 67.6 | 30.8 | 16.3 | 20.9 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Qadir MartinF | 34 | 31.4 | 11.6 | 7.0 | 1.0 | 59.2 | 18.6% | 34 | 1.1334 games | 1834 games |
| Bernie Blunt IIIG | 34 | 30.9 | 17.6 | 3.1 | 2.2 | 56.0 | 30.0% | 34 | 1.7234 games | 20034 games |
| Jake LemelmanG | 34 | 30.0 | 13.9 | 2.5 | 3.2 | 53.1 | 26.9% | 34 | 1.8334 games | 15434 games |
| Deshaun Jackson Jr.G | 34 | 22.4 | 6.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 49.1 | 18.1% | 34 | 2.1034 games | 334 games |
| Christian GambleG | 34 | 21.1 | 3.9 | 1.6 | 2.1 | 47.4 | 12.2% | 34 | 3.7934 games | 7334 games |
| Mykolas IvanauskasF | 32 | 19.6 | 7.4 | 5.1 | 0.4 | 58.1 | 20.6% | 32 | 0.4132 games | 3132 games |
| Sean LangG | 32 | 13.4 | 0.8 | 2.4 | 1.0 | 34.1 | 6.1% | 32 | 3.8832 games | 1932 games |
| Cameron JohnsonF | 33 | 12.2 | 3.4 | 2.4 | 0.5 | 47.7 | 18.4% | 33 | 0.7533 games | 2833 games |
| Kaden FuhrmannG | 32 | 11.6 | 3.3 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 53.1 | 16.4% | 32 | 2.0832 games | 8032 games |
| James ThomasF | 33 | 9.6 | 1.4 | 2.0 | 0.4 | 44.7 | 10.8% | 33 | 1.2733 games | 033 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 Mercyhurst?
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.
15Source-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 | 10 | 4,461 | 4,461 | — | 100% | — |
| Forward | 5 | 2,438 | 2,438 | — | 100% | — |
| Center | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
0 listed players have no recognized source position. The workload denominator is the matched prior-production sample (6,899 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?
15 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% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Qadir Martin →F | Same programMercyhurst Lakers | 31.4 | 11.6 | 59.2% |
| Bernie Blunt III →G | Same programMercyhurst Lakers | 30.9 | 17.6 | 56.0% |
| Jake Lemelman →G | Same programMercyhurst Lakers | 30.0 | 13.9 | 53.1% |
| Deshaun Jackson Jr. →G | Same programMercyhurst Lakers | 22.4 | 6.0 | 49.1% |
| Christian Gamble →G | Same programMercyhurst Lakers | 21.1 | 3.9 | 47.4% |
| Mykolas Ivanauskas →F | Same programMercyhurst Lakers | 19.6 | 7.4 | 58.1% |
| Sean Lang →G | Same programMercyhurst Lakers | 13.4 | 0.8 | 34.1% |
| Cameron Johnson →F | Same programMercyhurst Lakers | 12.2 | 3.4 | 47.7% |
| Kaden Fuhrmann →G | Same programMercyhurst Lakers | 11.6 | 3.3 | 53.1% |
| James Thomas →F | Same programMercyhurst Lakers | 9.6 | 1.4 | 44.7% |
| Or Faran →G | Same programMercyhurst Lakers | 5.2 | 1.2 | 33.5% |
| Vladimir Pavlovic →G | Same programMercyhurst Lakers | 4.4 | 0.8 | 33.3% |
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…
Mercyhurst vs Marquette
59.8Mercyhurst
80.1Marquette
Marquette win estimate91.6%
Model signalStrong lean
Projected home margin20.3
Projected total140.0
80% home-margin range4.4 to 36.2
Estimated possessions66.8
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityHome 1.0 pts
Marquette attack 53.5% · Mercyhurst defense 52.8%Mercyhurst attack 49.0% · Marquette defense 49.3%
Ball securityAway 1.9 pts
Marquette attack 15.2% · Mercyhurst defense 18.2%Mercyhurst attack 15.6% · Marquette defense 20.5%
Second chancesHome 3.2 pts
Marquette attack 29.7% · Mercyhurst defense 32.0%Mercyhurst attack 25.2% · Marquette defense 30.7%
Free-throw pressureAway 7.2 pts
Marquette attack 31.6% · Mercyhurst defense 41.3%Mercyhurst attack 28.7% · Marquette defense 31.2%
Fiserv Forum
Preseason baseline · roster changes are not model features.
No verified pregame market line imported. Check the forecast record →
Mercyhurst vs Syracuse
63.0Mercyhurst
78.1Syracuse
Syracuse win estimate85.9%
Model signalStrong lean
Projected home margin15.1
Projected total141.1
80% home-margin range-0.9 to 31.0
Estimated possessions66.3
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityHome 1.7 pts
Syracuse attack 53.0% · Mercyhurst defense 52.8%Mercyhurst attack 49.0% · Syracuse defense 50.5%
Ball securityAway 0.3 pts
Syracuse attack 16.7% · Mercyhurst defense 18.2%Mercyhurst attack 15.6% · Syracuse defense 17.4%
Second chancesHome 2.8 pts
Syracuse attack 30.0% · Mercyhurst defense 32.0%Mercyhurst attack 25.2% · Syracuse defense 29.9%
Free-throw pressureAway 1.9 pts
Syracuse attack 35.6% · Mercyhurst defense 41.3%Mercyhurst attack 28.7% · Syracuse defense 32.5%
JMA Wireless Dome
Preseason baseline · roster changes are not model features.
No verified pregame market line imported. Check the forecast record →
Mercyhurst vs St Bonaventure
62.5Mercyhurst
75.1St Bonaventure
St Bonaventure win estimate82.3%
Model signalStrong lean
Projected home margin12.5
Projected total137.6
80% home-margin range-3.4 to 28.5
Estimated possessions64.5
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityHome 1.5 pts
St Bonaventure attack 51.9% · Mercyhurst defense 52.8%Mercyhurst attack 49.0% · St Bonaventure defense 51.4%
Ball securityAway 0.6 pts
St Bonaventure attack 16.7% · Mercyhurst defense 18.2%Mercyhurst attack 15.6% · St Bonaventure defense 17.7%
Second chancesHome 2.4 pts
St Bonaventure attack 31.0% · Mercyhurst defense 32.0%Mercyhurst attack 25.2% · St Bonaventure defense 28.5%
Free-throw pressureAway 5.7 pts
St Bonaventure attack 32.0% · Mercyhurst defense 41.3%Mercyhurst attack 28.7% · St Bonaventure defense 32.3%
Reilly 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 →