A relative strength
Offensive rebound rate
36.4% · rank 29 of 366 · 35 games
Who crashes the glass, and how does that affect transition defense?
← Program librarySource edition Sep 12, 2026
The program dossier / men’s basketball
Santa Clara
2025–26 performance, personnel and game context.
A starting point for 2026–27 preparation.
Independent preseason modelNo.42
+15.4 adjusted net
per 100 estimated possessions
26–92025–26 recorded finals
117.6Adjusted offense · 2026–27 baseline
102.2Adjusted defense · lower is better
69.8Model tempo · possessions / 40 min
Publisher lens / exact source team ID
A second read on Santa Clara.
Checking the attributed publisher rating…
01 / Both ends of the floor
The possession profile.
26–935 recorded games · 35 paired efficiency samples · pace 69.6Mean opponent adj. net 6.5 · 34 rated opponents
Offense
Effective FG%
54.4%35 games · higher is betterRank 65 / 366 · 82th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent effective FG%
51.6%35 games · lower is betterRank 214 / 366 · 42th favorable percentileOffense
Turnover rate
15.3%35 games · lower is betterRank 95 / 366 · 74th favorable percentileDefense
Turnovers forced
20.0%35 games · higher is betterRank 32 / 366 · 92th favorable percentileOffense
Offensive rebound rate
36.4%35 games · higher is betterRank 29 / 366 · 92th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent offensive rebound rate
31.8%35 games · lower is betterRank 273 / 366 · 25th favorable percentileOffense
Free-throw attempt rate
25.0%35 games · higher is betterRank 363 / 366 · 1th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent free-throw attempt rate
37.5%35 games · lower is betterRank 265 / 366 · 28th favorable percentileShooting and ball-movement detail
| Metric | Observed rate | Games | Definition |
|---|---|---|---|
| Offensive efficiency | 118.7 | 35 | Points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Defensive efficiency | 104.4 | 35 | Opponent points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Two-point FG% | 56.4% | 35 | (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Opponent two-point FG% | 53.0% | 35 | Opponent (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Three-point FG% | 34.7% | 35 | 3PM / 3PA. |
| Opponent three-point FG% | 32.8% | 35 | Opponent 3PM / 3PA. |
| Three-point attempt share | 45.1% | 35 | 3PA / FGA; a style measure, not a quality grade. |
| Opponent three-point attempt share | 38.5% | 35 | Opponent 3PA / FGA; a style measure. |
| Free-throw accuracy | 74.0% | 35 | FTM / FTA. |
| Opponent free-throw accuracy | 73.4% | 35 | Opponent FTM / FTA; not attributed to defensive skill. |
| Assisted field-goal share | 55.3% | 35 | Assists / FGM; describes recorded ball movement. |
| Opponent assisted FG share | 60.7% | 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?
2,450 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
Turnovers forced
20.0% · rank 32 of 366 · 35 games
Which defensive actions produce takeaways, and what shots do they concede?
A closer look
Opponent offensive rebound rate
31.8% · rank 273 of 366 · 35 games
Which matchups demand an extra box-out assignment?
A closer look
Free-throw attempt rate
25.0% · rank 363 of 366 · 35 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 7 times in the selected window; Santa Clara 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 20, 2026 · neutral vs Kentucky · L 84–89 · offense 112.6 / 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 · 35 games
| Game / venue | Result | Current opponent rank | Off. eff. | Def. eff. | Pace | eFG% | TO% | ORB% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| KentuckyMar 20, 2026 · neutral | L 84–89 | 20 | 112.6 | 119.3 | 66.3 | 49.3 | 9.4 | 27.9 |
| GonzagaMar 11, 2026 · neutral | L 68–79 | 8 | 112.7 | 130.9 | 60.4 | 44.9 | 14.9 | 46.5 |
| Saint Mary'sMar 10, 2026 · neutral | W 76–71 | 18 | 122.9 | 114.8 | 61.8 | 57.3 | 6.5 | 26.3 |
| PacificMar 9, 2026 · neutral | W 76–68 | 207 | 128.4 | 114.9 | 59.2 | 55.6 | 15.2 | 45.7 |
| Oregon StMar 1, 2026 · home | W 93–72 | 139 | 135.8 | 105.2 | 68.5 | 54.5 | 16.1 | 48.7 |
| Saint Mary'sFeb 26, 2026 · road | L 67–86 | 18 | 102.4 | 131.5 | 65.4 | 47.5 | 12.2 | 16.7 |
| San FranciscoFeb 22, 2026 · road | W 94–73 | 89 | 125.9 | 97.8 | 74.7 | 57.9 | 13.4 | 37.5 |
| GonzagaFeb 15, 2026 · home | L 86–94 | 8 | 112.6 | 123.1 | 76.4 | 53.1 | 15.7 | 23.7 |
| Seattle UFeb 12, 2026 · home | W 84–72 | 120 | 122.8 | 105.2 | 68.4 | 53.0 | 4.4 | 23.7 |
| Washington StFeb 7, 2026 · road | W 96–92 | 117 | 135.5 | 129.8 | 70.9 | 62.9 | 14.1 | 34.4 |
| PacificFeb 5, 2026 · road | W 71–56 | 207 | 110.9 | 87.4 | 64.1 | 50.8 | 10.9 | 27.5 |
| LMUFeb 1, 2026 · road | W 104–73 | 160 | 134.1 | 94.1 | 77.5 | 59.7 | 15.5 | 46.2 |
| San FranciscoJan 29, 2026 · home | W 88–73 | 89 | 127.4 | 105.7 | 69.1 | 60.0 | 10.1 | 27.3 |
| San DiegoJan 25, 2026 · road | W 85–73 | 263 | 114.0 | 97.9 | 74.6 | 73.1 | 28.2 | 26.9 |
| Saint Mary'sJan 18, 2026 · home | W 62–54 | 18 | 92.6 | 80.6 | 67.0 | 43.5 | 14.9 | 21.2 |
| PacificJan 15, 2026 · home | W 85–69 | 207 | 129.6 | 105.2 | 65.6 | 56.7 | 10.7 | 28.1 |
| LMUJan 11, 2026 · home | W 103–72 | 160 | 134.2 | 93.8 | 76.7 | 55.8 | 9.1 | 41.9 |
| GonzagaJan 9, 2026 · road | L 77–89 | 8 | 105.1 | 121.4 | 73.3 | 48.5 | 20.5 | 34.2 |
| San DiegoJan 5, 2026 · home | W 98–70 | 263 | 131.6 | 94.0 | 74.5 | 59.5 | 18.8 | 51.4 |
| PepperdineJan 3, 2026 · home | W 82–63 | 261 | 110.0 | 84.5 | 74.6 | 55.2 | 16.1 | 26.5 |
| PortlandDec 31, 2025 · road | W 92–85 | 258 | 129.0 | 119.2 | 71.3 | 61.9 | 19.6 | 46.4 |
| Oregon StDec 28, 2025 · road | W 102–64 | 139 | 148.7 | 93.3 | 68.6 | 77.3 | 13.1 | 35.0 |
| Loyola ChicagoDec 20, 2025 · neutral | L 78–80 | 202 | 115.2 | 118.1 | 67.7 | 47.1 | 11.8 | 38.9 |
| North TexasDec 18, 2025 · neutral | W 63–60 | 101 | 93.3 | 88.9 | 67.5 | 49.1 | 31.1 | 43.3 |
| Arizona StDec 14, 2025 · neutral | L 79–82 | 84 | 108.1 | 112.3 | 73.1 | 50.8 | 20.5 | 33.3 |
| New MexicoDec 7, 2025 · road | L 71–98 | 40 | 99.2 | 137.0 | 71.6 | 44.9 | 21.0 | 40.9 |
| Utah TechDec 4, 2025 · home | W 90–80 | 240 | 117.7 | 104.6 | 76.5 | 54.6 | 18.3 | 45.0 |
| MinnesotaNov 29, 2025 · neutral | W 86–75 | 91 | 129.3 | 112.7 | 66.5 | 68.4 | 15.0 | 19.2 |
| Saint LouisNov 28, 2025 · neutral | L 70–71 | 55 | 99.0 | 100.4 | 70.7 | 41.9 | 17.0 | 30.8 |
| LouisianaNov 22, 2025 · home | W 80–43 | 297 | 120.4 | 64.7 | 66.5 | 47.2 | 12.0 | 50.0 |
| Idaho StNov 19, 2025 · home | W 64–55 | 239 | 100.0 | 85.9 | 64.0 | 37.9 | 12.5 | 43.2 |
| NevadaNov 16, 2025 · home | W 98–83 | 59 | 139.1 | 117.8 | 70.4 | 72.1 | 15.6 | 37.0 |
| XavierNov 11, 2025 · road | W 87–68 | 68 | 121.5 | 95.0 | 71.6 | 58.6 | 15.4 | 37.5 |
| McNeeseNov 8, 2025 · home | W 79–67 | 70 | 117.2 | 99.4 | 67.4 | 48.5 | 22.3 | 56.8 |
| HumboldtNov 5, 2025 · home | W 83–53 | Unrated | 113.6 | 72.6 | 73.0 | 54.1 | 12.3 | 35.0 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elijah MahiF | 35 | 30.4 | 14.1 | 4.7 | 2.6 | 53.9 | 23.4% | 35 | 1.5135 games | 16035 games |
| Christian HammondG | 34 | 30.3 | 15.6 | 3.0 | 2.5 | 58.0 | 24.3% | 34 | 1.4234 games | 13534 games |
| Jake EnsmingerG | 32 | 28.8 | 6.5 | 5.5 | 2.9 | 66.4 | 9.7% | 32 | 3.1732 games | 8832 games |
| Allen GravesF | 35 | 22.6 | 11.8 | 6.5 | 1.8 | 61.3 | 22.1% | 35 | 2.5235 games | 9235 games |
| Brenton KnapperG | 33 | 21.5 | 7.5 | 1.8 | 2.2 | 49.0 | 19.8% | 33 | 1.7833 games | 11333 games |
| Sash GavalyugovG | 35 | 20.0 | 9.0 | 1.9 | 2.7 | 52.5 | 23.9% | 35 | 1.9835 games | 18735 games |
| Thierry DarlanG | 35 | 17.9 | 6.1 | 3.6 | 0.9 | 54.9 | 18.5% | 35 | 0.6735 games | 11835 games |
| Bukky OboyeC | 34 | 17.8 | 7.9 | 4.1 | 0.6 | 69.1 | 17.7% | 34 | 0.7134 games | 3334 games |
| KJ CochranG | 34 | 11.8 | 4.7 | 1.4 | 0.6 | 52.7 | 19.8% | 34 | 1.2734 games | 8534 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 Santa Clara?
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
10Same-program prior records
0Different-program records
74%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 | 11 | 4,403 | 4,403 | — | 100% | — |
| Forward | 2 | — | — | — | — | — |
| Center | 2 | 768 | 768 | — | 100% | — |
0 listed players have no recognized source position. The workload denominator is the matched prior-production sample (5,171 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% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Christian Hammond →G | Same programSanta Clara Broncos | 30.3 | 15.6 | 58.0% |
| Jake Ensminger →G | Same programSanta Clara Broncos | 28.8 | 6.5 | 66.4% |
| Brenton Knapper →G | Same programSanta Clara Broncos | 21.5 | 7.5 | 49.0% |
| Sash Gavalyugov →G | Same programSanta Clara Broncos | 20.0 | 9.0 | 52.5% |
| Thierry Darlan →G | Same programSanta Clara Broncos | 17.9 | 6.1 | 54.9% |
| Bukky Oboye →C | Same programSanta Clara Broncos | 17.8 | 7.9 | 69.1% |
| KJ Cochran →G | Same programSanta Clara Broncos | 11.8 | 4.7 | 52.7% |
| Francis Chukwudebelu →C | Same programSanta Clara Broncos | 6.8 | 1.4 | 52.1% |
| Brendan Yarusso →G | Same programSanta Clara Broncos | 1.2 | 2.0 | 57.6% |
| Juan Reyna →G | Same programSanta Clara Broncos | 2.0 | 0.0 | — |
| Brad Longcor III →G | No prior appearance observedNo prior program listed | — | — | — |
| Chris Tadjo →F | No prior appearance observedNo prior program listed | — | — | — |
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…
Santa Clara vs Nevada
76.8Santa Clara
74.1Nevada
Nevada win estimate46.7%
Model signalToss-up
Projected home margin-2.7
Projected total150.9
80% home-margin range-18.6 to 13.2
Estimated possessions68.2
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityAway 2.7 pts
Nevada attack 52.1% · Santa Clara defense 50.0%Santa Clara attack 54.6% · Nevada defense 49.8%
Ball securityHome 1.7 pts
Nevada attack 15.2% · Santa Clara defense 17.7%Santa Clara attack 16.7% · Nevada defense 17.5%
Second chancesAway 5.8 pts
Nevada attack 29.8% · Santa Clara defense 28.2%Santa Clara attack 34.4% · Nevada defense 27.0%
Free-throw pressureHome 14.8 pts
Nevada attack 42.3% · Santa Clara defense 35.4%Santa Clara attack 29.2% · Nevada defense 37.1%
Lawlor Events Center
Preseason baseline · roster changes are not model features.
No verified pregame market line imported. Check the forecast record →
Santa Clara vs Grand Canyon
76.0Santa Clara
76.3Grand Canyon
Grand Canyon win estimate54.7%
Model signalToss-up
Projected home margin0.2
Projected total152.3
80% home-margin range-15.7 to 16.2
Estimated possessions71.1
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityAway 4.9 pts
Grand Canyon attack 51.8% · Santa Clara defense 50.0%Santa Clara attack 54.6% · Grand Canyon defense 47.9%
Ball securityAway 0.9 pts
Grand Canyon attack 17.5% · Santa Clara defense 17.7%Santa Clara attack 16.7% · Grand Canyon defense 17.8%
Second chancesAway 3.3 pts
Grand Canyon attack 31.6% · Santa Clara defense 28.2%Santa Clara attack 34.4% · Grand Canyon defense 27.7%
Free-throw pressureHome 11.7 pts
Grand Canyon attack 40.6% · Santa Clara defense 35.4%Santa Clara attack 29.2% · Grand Canyon defense 35.7%
Global Credit Union Arena
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 →