A relative strength
Opponent effective FG%
48.6% · rank 63 of 366 · 32 games
What coverages and lineups account for the shot quality opponents receive?
← Program librarySource edition Sep 12, 2026
The program dossier / men’s basketball
Quinnipiac
2025–26 performance, personnel and game context.
A starting point for 2026–27 preparation.
Independent preseason modelNo.192
-2.1 adjusted net
per 100 estimated possessions
19–132025–26 recorded finals
103.6Adjusted offense · 2026–27 baseline
105.7Adjusted defense · lower is better
70.9Model tempo · possessions / 40 min
Publisher lens / exact source team ID
A second read on Quinnipiac.
Checking the attributed publisher rating…
01 / Both ends of the floor
The possession profile.
19–1332 recorded games · 32 paired efficiency samples · pace 70.0Mean opponent adj. net -5.2 · 31 rated opponents
Offense
Effective FG%
48.8%32 games · higher is betterRank 313 / 366 · 15th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent effective FG%
48.6%32 games · lower is betterRank 63 / 366 · 83th favorable percentileOffense
Turnover rate
15.6%32 games · lower is betterRank 110 / 366 · 70th favorable percentileDefense
Turnovers forced
17.5%32 games · higher is betterRank 135 / 366 · 63th favorable percentileOffense
Offensive rebound rate
34.4%32 games · higher is betterRank 69 / 366 · 81th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent offensive rebound rate
31.3%32 games · lower is betterRank 254 / 366 · 31th favorable percentileOffense
Free-throw attempt rate
33.1%32 games · higher is betterRank 230 / 366 · 37th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent free-throw attempt rate
30.1%32 games · lower is betterRank 73 / 366 · 80th favorable percentileShooting and ball-movement detail
| Metric | Observed rate | Games | Definition |
|---|---|---|---|
| Offensive efficiency | 106.8 | 32 | Points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Defensive efficiency | 102.1 | 32 | Opponent points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Two-point FG% | 47.2% | 32 | (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Opponent two-point FG% | 47.1% | 32 | Opponent (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Three-point FG% | 34.6% | 32 | 3PM / 3PA. |
| Opponent three-point FG% | 34.1% | 32 | Opponent 3PM / 3PA. |
| Three-point attempt share | 34.1% | 32 | 3PA / FGA; a style measure, not a quality grade. |
| Opponent three-point attempt share | 35.7% | 32 | Opponent 3PA / FGA; a style measure. |
| Free-throw accuracy | 68.5% | 32 | FTM / FTA. |
| Opponent free-throw accuracy | 73.3% | 32 | Opponent FTM / FTA; not attributed to defensive skill. |
| Assisted field-goal share | 50.5% | 32 | Assists / FGM; describes recorded ball movement. |
| Opponent assisted FG share | 52.4% | 32 | 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?
2,248 source possession rows across 32 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
Offensive rebound rate
34.4% · rank 69 of 366 · 32 games
Who crashes the glass, and how does that affect transition defense?
A closer look
Opponent offensive rebound rate
31.3% · rank 254 of 366 · 32 games
Which matchups demand an extra box-out assignment?
A closer look
Effective FG%
48.8% · rank 313 of 366 · 32 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 7 times in the selected window; Quinnipiac won 3. 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 7, 2026 · neutral vs Marist · L 75–77 · offense 102.6 / defense 105.4
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 · 32 games
| Game / venue | Result | Current opponent rank | Off. eff. | Def. eff. | Pace | eFG% | TO% | ORB% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MaristMar 7, 2026 · neutral | L 75–77 | 200 | 102.6 | 105.4 | 73.1 | 42.9 | 17.8 | 37.0 |
| CanisiusMar 1, 2026 · road | W 67–63 | 354 | 100.9 | 94.8 | 66.4 | 39.8 | 10.5 | 31.8 |
| NiagaraFeb 27, 2026 · road | L 76–78 | 331 | 110.9 | 113.8 | 60.9 | 47.6 | 10.2 | 30.6 |
| FairfieldFeb 22, 2026 · home | L 79–85 | 271 | 115.5 | 124.3 | 68.4 | 51.6 | 13.2 | 42.5 |
| MerrimackFeb 15, 2026 · home | L 49–56 | 180 | 75.1 | 85.8 | 65.3 | 28.7 | 24.5 | 52.4 |
| SienaFeb 14, 2026 · road | W 74–62 | 221 | 110.8 | 92.8 | 66.8 | 49.2 | 10.5 | 32.5 |
| NiagaraFeb 7, 2026 · home | W 56–55 | 331 | 94.6 | 92.9 | 59.2 | 36.7 | 20.3 | 42.2 |
| CanisiusFeb 6, 2026 · home | W 75–60 | 354 | 102.2 | 81.8 | 73.4 | 50.0 | 21.8 | 32.3 |
| FairfieldFeb 1, 2026 · road | W 72–65 | 271 | 104.8 | 94.6 | 68.7 | 54.1 | 18.9 | 29.0 |
| Sacred HeartJan 31, 2026 · home | L 91–98 | 279 | 120.4 | 129.7 | 75.6 | 53.6 | 11.9 | 35.0 |
| MaristJan 24, 2026 · road | L 64–71 | 200 | 96.9 | 107.5 | 66.1 | 41.1 | 10.6 | 29.3 |
| Mount St MarysJan 23, 2026 · road | W 77–62 | 264 | 110.0 | 88.6 | 70.0 | 54.1 | 12.9 | 18.9 |
| ManhattanJan 19, 2026 · home | W 98–92 | 323 | 122.4 | 114.9 | 71.2 | 58.3 | 16.2 | 44.1 |
| MerrimackJan 17, 2026 · road | L 71–83 | 180 | 105.8 | 123.7 | 67.1 | 47.3 | 13.4 | 29.0 |
| Saint Peter'sJan 15, 2026 · home | L 70–74 | 250 | 100.2 | 105.9 | 69.9 | 46.6 | 14.3 | 27.3 |
| Sacred HeartJan 11, 2026 · road | W 70–60 | 279 | 108.3 | 92.8 | 64.7 | 50.0 | 10.8 | 27.8 |
| Mount St MarysJan 4, 2026 · home | W 80–69 | 264 | 113.0 | 97.5 | 70.8 | 51.8 | 15.5 | 40.7 |
| ManhattanJan 3, 2026 · road | L 79–80 | 323 | 110.2 | 111.6 | 71.7 | 53.1 | 20.9 | 38.2 |
| MaristDec 29, 2025 · home | W 64–58 | 200 | 93.6 | 84.8 | 68.4 | 41.8 | 21.9 | 40.5 |
| HofstraDec 21, 2025 · road | L 66–74 | 115 | 98.2 | 110.1 | 67.2 | 41.8 | 11.9 | 26.8 |
| MonmouthDec 18, 2025 · road | W 85–75 | 211 | 118.1 | 104.2 | 72.0 | 57.0 | 15.3 | 35.5 |
| UMass LowellDec 13, 2025 · home | W 75–71 | 272 | 100.0 | 94.7 | 75.0 | 44.4 | 13.3 | 34.2 |
| RiderDec 7, 2025 · home | W 72–58 | 342 | 105.1 | 84.6 | 68.5 | 47.1 | 11.7 | 33.3 |
| IonaDec 6, 2025 · road | W 89–68 | 215 | 121.8 | 93.1 | 73.1 | 54.1 | 16.4 | 47.4 |
| StonehillNov 30, 2025 · home | W 76–62 | 341 | 109.7 | 89.5 | 69.3 | 54.1 | 14.4 | 23.3 |
| UCFNov 26, 2025 · road | L 91–102 | 56 | 116.3 | 130.4 | 78.2 | 55.4 | 14.1 | 17.1 |
| PittNov 23, 2025 · road | W 83–75 | 71 | 121.3 | 109.6 | 68.5 | 68.4 | 21.9 | 30.4 |
| City (NY)Nov 20, 2025 · home | W 112–52 | Unrated | 145.0 | 67.3 | 77.2 | 63.9 | 6.5 | 43.6 |
| MaineNov 16, 2025 · road | W 70–64 | 306 | 100.2 | 91.6 | 69.9 | 38.9 | 17.2 | 43.9 |
| YaleNov 12, 2025 · home | L 60–97 | 62 | 84.0 | 135.8 | 71.4 | 43.4 | 23.8 | 35.3 |
| C ConnecticutNov 7, 2025 · home | W 71–49 | 260 | 102.9 | 71.0 | 69.0 | 46.5 | 7.2 | 26.3 |
| St John'sNov 3, 2025 · road | L 74–108 | 14 | 88.5 | 129.2 | 83.6 | 45.5 | 26.3 | 32.6 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grant RandallF | 32 | 31.7 | 11.4 | 6.6 | 0.8 | 56.5 | 16.3% | 32 | 1.2632 games | 12432 games |
| Amarri MonroeF | 30 | 33.4 | 15.6 | 8.3 | 2.2 | 49.9 | 26.6% | 30 | 0.8530 games | 13130 games |
| Asim JonesG | 32 | 28.8 | 12.5 | 2.4 | 3.9 | 53.6 | 23.4% | 32 | 1.8332 games | 9732 games |
| Jaden ZimmermanG | 26 | 32.4 | 15.1 | 2.5 | 2.3 | 48.3 | 26.8% | 26 | 1.0026 games | 15126 games |
| Keith McKnightG | 32 | 24.8 | 11.0 | 5.9 | 1.1 | 57.4 | 21.1% | 32 | 0.9032 games | 1532 games |
| Spence WeweF | 32 | 16.5 | 2.6 | 5.2 | 0.4 | 50.6 | 9.5% | 32 | 0.5532 games | 032 games |
| Nate GuerengombaG | 29 | 14.1 | 2.5 | 1.7 | 0.7 | 41.4 | 12.2% | 29 | 1.2529 games | 1729 games |
| Tai TurnageG | 30 | 12.6 | 3.6 | 1.3 | 2.1 | 45.2 | 16.9% | 30 | 4.9230 games | 5430 games |
| Samson ReillyG | 27 | 9.3 | 4.5 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 63.3 | 19.5% | 27 | 2.0027 games | 7727 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 Quinnipiac?
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.
0Source-listed players
0Same-program prior records
0Different-program records
—Prior minutes represented
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?
No source-listed roster rows were observed for this program in the current release.
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…
No upcoming games for this program in the partial schedule.
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 →