A relative strength
Opponent free-throw attempt rate
28.9% · rank 53 of 366 · 35 games
Which defenders can protect the paint without surrendering free throws?
← Program librarySource edition Sep 12, 2026
The program dossier / men’s basketball
BYU
2025–26 performance, personnel and game context.
A starting point for 2026–27 preparation.
Independent preseason modelNo.19
+21.4 adjusted net
per 100 estimated possessions
23–122025–26 recorded finals
121.4Adjusted offense · 2026–27 baseline
100.0Adjusted defense · lower is better
69.6Model tempo · possessions / 40 min
Publisher lens / exact source team ID
A second read on BYU.
Checking the attributed publisher rating…
01 / Both ends of the floor
The possession profile.
23–1235 recorded games · 35 paired efficiency samples · pace 70.4Mean opponent adj. net 13.1 · 35 rated opponents
Offense
Effective FG%
54.4%35 games · higher is betterRank 64 / 366 · 83th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent effective FG%
51.2%35 games · lower is betterRank 201 / 366 · 45th favorable percentileOffense
Turnover rate
15.2%35 games · lower is betterRank 82 / 366 · 78th favorable percentileDefense
Turnovers forced
16.4%35 games · higher is betterRank 213 / 366 · 42th favorable percentileOffense
Offensive rebound rate
34.3%35 games · higher is betterRank 71 / 366 · 81th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent offensive rebound rate
29.6%35 games · lower is betterRank 165 / 366 · 55th favorable percentileOffense
Free-throw attempt rate
34.4%35 games · higher is betterRank 197 / 366 · 46th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent free-throw attempt rate
28.9%35 games · lower is betterRank 53 / 366 · 86th favorable percentileShooting and ball-movement detail
| Metric | Observed rate | Games | Definition |
|---|---|---|---|
| Offensive efficiency | 118.3 | 35 | Points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Defensive efficiency | 106.8 | 35 | Opponent points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Two-point FG% | 56.2% | 35 | (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Opponent two-point FG% | 50.1% | 35 | Opponent (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Three-point FG% | 34.5% | 35 | 3PM / 3PA. |
| Opponent three-point FG% | 35.3% | 35 | Opponent 3PM / 3PA. |
| Three-point attempt share | 39.8% | 35 | 3PA / FGA; a style measure, not a quality grade. |
| Opponent three-point attempt share | 39.0% | 35 | Opponent 3PA / FGA; a style measure. |
| Free-throw accuracy | 74.7% | 35 | FTM / FTA. |
| Opponent free-throw accuracy | 70.6% | 35 | Opponent FTM / FTA; not attributed to defensive skill. |
| Assisted field-goal share | 45.0% | 35 | Assists / FGM; describes recorded ball movement. |
| Opponent assisted FG share | 54.0% | 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?
2,498 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
Effective FG%
54.4% · rank 64 of 366 · 35 games
Which actions create the team's efficient looks, and which personnel can reproduce them?
A closer look
Opponent effective FG%
51.2% · rank 201 of 366 · 35 games
What coverages and lineups account for the shot quality opponents receive?
A closer look
Turnovers forced
16.4% · rank 213 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; BYU 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 19, 2026 · neutral vs Texas · L 71–79 · offense 106.0 / defense 118.0
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 · 35 games
| Game / venue | Result | Current opponent rank | Off. eff. | Def. eff. | Pace | eFG% | TO% | ORB% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TexasMar 19, 2026 · neutral | L 71–79 | 34 | 106.0 | 118.0 | 67.0 | 46.4 | 10.5 | 25.0 |
| HoustonMar 12, 2026 · neutral | L 66–73 | 2 | 95.3 | 105.4 | 69.3 | 49.0 | 26.0 | 28.1 |
| West VirginiaMar 11, 2026 · neutral | W 68–48 | 52 | 108.5 | 76.6 | 62.7 | 50.8 | 20.8 | 44.4 |
| Kansas StMar 10, 2026 · neutral | W 105–91 | 83 | 135.0 | 117.0 | 77.8 | 62.3 | 14.1 | 41.2 |
| Texas TechMar 8, 2026 · home | W 82–76 | 16 | 134.6 | 124.8 | 60.9 | 48.6 | 4.9 | 46.5 |
| CincinnatiMar 4, 2026 · road | L 68–90 | 41 | 94.8 | 125.5 | 71.7 | 47.4 | 20.9 | 27.8 |
| West VirginiaFeb 28, 2026 · road | L 71–79 | 52 | 112.3 | 124.9 | 63.2 | 55.9 | 19.0 | 27.6 |
| UCFFeb 25, 2026 · home | L 84–97 | 56 | 108.3 | 125.0 | 77.6 | 47.2 | 11.6 | 27.3 |
| Iowa StateFeb 22, 2026 · home | W 79–69 | 5 | 118.3 | 103.4 | 66.8 | 56.0 | 16.5 | 35.3 |
| ArizonaFeb 19, 2026 · road | L 68–75 | 3 | 102.8 | 113.4 | 66.2 | 47.4 | 13.6 | 25.0 |
| ColoradoFeb 14, 2026 · home | W 90–86 | 69 | 109.5 | 104.6 | 73.1 | 55.6 | 19.5 | 21.1 |
| BaylorFeb 11, 2026 · road | W 99–94 | 33 | 134.0 | 127.2 | 73.9 | 58.1 | 6.8 | 35.3 |
| HoustonFeb 8, 2026 · home | L 66–77 | 2 | 112.4 | 131.1 | 58.7 | 47.2 | 10.2 | 34.1 |
| Oklahoma StFeb 5, 2026 · road | L 92–99 | 88 | 117.8 | 126.7 | 78.1 | 59.8 | 20.5 | 33.3 |
| KansasJan 31, 2026 · road | L 82–90 | 17 | 118.4 | 130.0 | 69.2 | 53.8 | 10.1 | 30.0 |
| ArizonaJan 27, 2026 · home | L 83–86 | 3 | 109.8 | 113.7 | 75.6 | 49.3 | 15.9 | 33.3 |
| UtahJan 24, 2026 · home | W 91–78 | 93 | 140.9 | 120.8 | 64.6 | 60.0 | 12.4 | 43.8 |
| Texas TechJan 18, 2026 · road | L 71–84 | 16 | 101.0 | 119.5 | 70.3 | 46.1 | 17.1 | 31.6 |
| TCUJan 15, 2026 · home | W 76–70 | 48 | 109.1 | 100.5 | 69.7 | 39.0 | 12.9 | 43.8 |
| UtahJan 11, 2026 · road | W 89–84 | 93 | 121.3 | 114.5 | 73.4 | 54.7 | 15.0 | 41.0 |
| Arizona StJan 8, 2026 · home | W 104–76 | 84 | 133.8 | 97.8 | 77.7 | 68.9 | 20.6 | 37.9 |
| Kansas StJan 3, 2026 · road | W 83–73 | 83 | 106.5 | 93.7 | 77.9 | 51.6 | 24.4 | 40.0 |
| E WashingtonDec 23, 2025 · home | W 109–81 | 199 | 145.1 | 107.9 | 75.1 | 64.8 | 12.0 | 42.9 |
| Abilene ChrstnDec 20, 2025 · home | W 85–67 | 248 | 118.8 | 93.6 | 71.6 | 66.7 | 25.2 | 30.0 |
| PacificDec 17, 2025 · home | W 93–57 | 207 | 129.8 | 79.6 | 71.6 | 55.6 | 12.6 | 38.2 |
| UC RiversideDec 14, 2025 · home | W 100–53 | 241 | 132.7 | 70.3 | 75.4 | 65.9 | 13.3 | 36.1 |
| ClemsonDec 9, 2025 · neutral | W 67–64 | 26 | 110.0 | 105.1 | 60.9 | 44.4 | 14.8 | 43.2 |
| CA BaptistDec 4, 2025 · home | W 91–60 | 131 | 131.2 | 86.5 | 69.3 | 60.6 | 13.0 | 41.9 |
| DaytonNov 29, 2025 · neutral | W 83–79 | 58 | 111.3 | 105.9 | 74.6 | 60.7 | 20.1 | 17.2 |
| MiamiNov 27, 2025 · neutral | W 72–62 | 57 | 104.7 | 90.1 | 68.8 | 53.6 | 18.9 | 27.3 |
| WisconsinNov 21, 2025 · home | W 98–70 | 21 | 131.4 | 93.9 | 74.6 | 58.5 | 10.7 | 30.0 |
| UConnNov 16, 2025 · neutral | L 84–86 | 10 | 112.9 | 115.6 | 74.4 | 55.9 | 18.8 | 33.3 |
| DelawareNov 12, 2025 · home | W 85–68 | 251 | 140.0 | 112.0 | 60.7 | 54.5 | 11.5 | 51.4 |
| Holy CrossNov 9, 2025 · home | W 98–53 | 334 | 136.3 | 73.7 | 71.9 | 67.5 | 8.3 | 16.0 |
| VillanovaNov 4, 2025 · neutral | W 71–66 | 36 | 104.3 | 97.0 | 68.1 | 43.2 | 5.9 | 27.3 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Robert Wright IIIG | 35 | 34.9 | 18.1 | 3.5 | 4.6 | 56.7 | 25.2% | 35 | 2.0835 games | 13935 games |
| AJ DybantsaF | 35 | 34.8 | 25.5 | 6.8 | 3.7 | 60.0 | 33.9% | 35 | 1.2035 games | 14835 games |
| Kennard Davis Jr.F | 32 | 29.5 | 8.5 | 2.7 | 1.3 | 52.7 | 14.3% | 32 | 1.7832 games | 16532 games |
| Richie SaundersG | 25 | 31.3 | 18.0 | 5.8 | 2.1 | 63.2 | 24.3% | 25 | 1.2725 games | 17025 games |
| Keba KeitaF | 33 | 22.6 | 6.2 | 7.2 | 0.3 | 66.2 | 11.7% | 33 | 0.4033 games | 033 games |
| Khadim MboupF | 34 | 15.6 | 2.2 | 5.1 | 0.4 | 46.7 | 9.9% | 34 | 0.4634 games | 1234 games |
| Mihailo BoškovicF | 34 | 12.0 | 3.0 | 1.9 | 0.6 | 52.5 | 13.7% | 34 | 1.0034 games | 5334 games |
| Aleksej KosticG | 27 | 12.0 | 4.4 | 0.9 | 0.4 | 53.7 | 19.2% | 27 | 0.6527 games | 9027 games |
| Tyler MrusF | 26 | 10.0 | 2.0 | 0.9 | 0.3 | 49.7 | 10.8% | 26 | 1.3326 games | 4726 games |
| Abdullah AhmedC | 20 | 12.2 | 1.2 | 2.6 | 0.3 | 48.6 | 7.1% | 20 | 0.7020 games | 020 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 BYU?
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 →