A relative strength
Turnover rate
13.4% · rank 13 of 366 · 36 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
UCLA
2025–26 performance, personnel and game context.
A starting point for 2026–27 preparation.
Independent preseason modelNo.27
+18.8 adjusted net
per 100 estimated possessions
24–122025–26 recorded finals
116.7Adjusted offense · 2026–27 baseline
98.0Adjusted defense · lower is better
66.0Model tempo · possessions / 40 min
Publisher lens / exact source team ID
A second read on UCLA.
Checking the attributed publisher rating…
01 / Both ends of the floor
The possession profile.
24–1236 recorded games · 36 paired efficiency samples · pace 65.8Mean opponent adj. net 11.9 · 36 rated opponents
Offense
Effective FG%
53.4%36 games · higher is betterRank 102 / 366 · 72th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent effective FG%
50.4%36 games · lower is betterRank 152 / 366 · 59th favorable percentileOffense
Turnover rate
13.4%36 games · lower is betterRank 13 / 366 · 97th favorable percentileDefense
Turnovers forced
18.5%36 games · higher is betterRank 85 / 366 · 77th favorable percentileOffense
Offensive rebound rate
31.0%36 games · higher is betterRank 185 / 366 · 50th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent offensive rebound rate
33.3%36 games · lower is betterRank 320 / 366 · 13th favorable percentileOffense
Free-throw attempt rate
33.1%36 games · higher is betterRank 235 / 366 · 36th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent free-throw attempt rate
34.4%36 games · lower is betterRank 179 / 366 · 51th favorable percentileShooting and ball-movement detail
| Metric | Observed rate | Games | Definition |
|---|---|---|---|
| Offensive efficiency | 116.0 | 36 | Points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Defensive efficiency | 106.9 | 36 | Opponent points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Two-point FG% | 51.4% | 36 | (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Opponent two-point FG% | 52.3% | 36 | Opponent (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Three-point FG% | 37.9% | 36 | 3PM / 3PA. |
| Opponent three-point FG% | 32.0% | 36 | Opponent 3PM / 3PA. |
| Three-point attempt share | 35.5% | 36 | 3PA / FGA; a style measure, not a quality grade. |
| Opponent three-point attempt share | 44.8% | 36 | Opponent 3PA / FGA; a style measure. |
| Free-throw accuracy | 76.3% | 36 | FTM / FTA. |
| Opponent free-throw accuracy | 74.7% | 36 | Opponent FTM / FTA; not attributed to defensive skill. |
| Assisted field-goal share | 59.2% | 36 | Assists / FGM; describes recorded ball movement. |
| Opponent assisted FG share | 63.3% | 36 | 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?
2,388 source possession rows across 36 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
18.5% · rank 85 of 366 · 36 games
Which defensive actions produce takeaways, and what shots do they concede?
A closer look
Free-throw attempt rate
33.1% · rank 235 of 366 · 36 games
Who generates contact, and how do opponents keep them off the line?
A closer look
Opponent offensive rebound rate
33.3% · rank 320 of 366 · 36 games
Which matchups demand an extra box-out assignment?
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 9 times in the selected window; UCLA 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 23, 2026 · neutral vs UConn · L 57–73 · offense 90.5 / defense 115.9
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 · 36 games
| Game / venue | Result | Current opponent rank | Off. eff. | Def. eff. | Pace | eFG% | TO% | ORB% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UConnMar 23, 2026 · neutral | L 57–73 | 10 | 90.5 | 115.9 | 63.0 | 43.9 | 17.5 | 24.2 |
| UCFMar 20, 2026 · neutral | W 75–71 | 56 | 106.3 | 100.6 | 70.6 | 44.1 | 11.3 | 34.9 |
| PurdueMar 14, 2026 · neutral | L 66–73 | 9 | 110.7 | 122.4 | 59.6 | 50.0 | 10.1 | 27.3 |
| Michigan StMar 14, 2026 · neutral | W 88–84 | 13 | 131.9 | 125.9 | 66.7 | 67.6 | 12.0 | 25.0 |
| RutgersMar 13, 2026 · neutral | W 72–59 | 107 | 104.6 | 85.7 | 68.8 | 44.2 | 14.5 | 34.3 |
| USCMar 8, 2026 · road | W 89–68 | 72 | 142.2 | 108.7 | 62.6 | 65.3 | 9.6 | 36.7 |
| NebraskaMar 4, 2026 · home | W 72–52 | 24 | 118.7 | 85.7 | 60.7 | 55.0 | 13.2 | 32.4 |
| MinnesotaFeb 28, 2026 · road | L 73–78 | 91 | 131.4 | 140.4 | 55.6 | 59.6 | 10.8 | 35.7 |
| USCFeb 25, 2026 · home | W 81–62 | 72 | 123.4 | 94.5 | 65.6 | 54.8 | 7.6 | 25.0 |
| IllinoisFeb 22, 2026 · home | W 95–94 | 7 | 130.4 | 129.0 | 64.8 | 59.0 | 6.9 | 25.8 |
| Michigan StFeb 18, 2026 · road | L 59–82 | 13 | 90.1 | 125.3 | 65.5 | 43.9 | 16.8 | 23.7 |
| MichiganFeb 14, 2026 · road | L 56–86 | 6 | 87.5 | 134.3 | 64.0 | 43.1 | 20.3 | 36.1 |
| WashingtonFeb 8, 2026 · home | W 77–73 | 66 | 117.3 | 111.2 | 65.7 | 48.2 | 10.7 | 38.7 |
| RutgersFeb 4, 2026 · home | W 98–66 | 107 | 155.5 | 104.7 | 63.0 | 65.1 | 3.2 | 34.5 |
| IndianaJan 31, 2026 · home | L 97–98 | 44 | 109.5 | 110.6 | 70.9 | 44.1 | 11.3 | 27.3 |
| OregonJan 29, 2026 · road | W 73–57 | 61 | 118.5 | 92.5 | 61.6 | 45.7 | 6.5 | 32.4 |
| NorthwesternJan 24, 2026 · home | W 71–64 | 53 | 110.5 | 99.6 | 64.2 | 56.6 | 15.6 | 25.0 |
| PurdueJan 21, 2026 · home | W 69–67 | 9 | 118.2 | 114.8 | 58.4 | 65.7 | 17.1 | 19.0 |
| Ohio StateJan 17, 2026 · road | L 74–86 | 25 | 118.5 | 137.7 | 62.5 | 47.6 | 8.0 | 35.9 |
| Penn StateJan 15, 2026 · road | W 71–60 | 103 | 118.3 | 100.0 | 60.0 | 53.2 | 23.3 | 42.3 |
| MarylandJan 11, 2026 · home | W 67–55 | 63 | 102.3 | 84.0 | 65.5 | 48.0 | 9.2 | 15.2 |
| WisconsinJan 7, 2026 · road | L 72–80 | 21 | 100.9 | 112.1 | 71.4 | 46.7 | 14.0 | 25.7 |
| IowaJan 3, 2026 · road | L 61–74 | 28 | 98.3 | 119.3 | 62.0 | 47.3 | 19.3 | 36.4 |
| UC RiversideDec 23, 2025 · home | W 97–65 | 241 | 124.1 | 83.2 | 78.1 | 55.1 | 12.8 | 32.4 |
| Cal PolyDec 20, 2025 · home | W 108–87 | 246 | 137.4 | 110.7 | 78.6 | 67.2 | 10.2 | 16.0 |
| Arizona StDec 18, 2025 · home | W 90–77 | 84 | 126.9 | 108.6 | 70.9 | 58.1 | 11.3 | 31.4 |
| GonzagaDec 14, 2025 · neutral | L 72–82 | 8 | 109.7 | 125.0 | 65.6 | 55.9 | 15.2 | 20.0 |
| OregonDec 6, 2025 · home | W 74–63 | 61 | 121.9 | 103.8 | 60.7 | 50.9 | 14.8 | 46.9 |
| WashingtonDec 4, 2025 · road | W 82–80 | 66 | 126.1 | 123.0 | 65.1 | 61.3 | 10.8 | 29.6 |
| CaliforniaNov 26, 2025 · neutral | L 72–80 | 104 | 101.9 | 113.2 | 70.7 | 46.1 | 15.6 | 33.3 |
| PresbyterianNov 22, 2025 · home | W 86–46 | 257 | 127.9 | 68.4 | 67.3 | 68.6 | 16.4 | 26.1 |
| Sacramento StNov 19, 2025 · home | W 79–48 | 314 | 111.5 | 67.8 | 70.8 | 54.3 | 21.2 | 33.3 |
| ArizonaNov 15, 2025 · neutral | L 65–69 | 3 | 96.3 | 102.3 | 67.5 | 50.9 | 23.7 | 27.3 |
| West GeorgiaNov 11, 2025 · home | W 83–62 | 325 | 127.1 | 95.0 | 65.3 | 54.5 | 16.8 | 48.1 |
| PepperdineNov 8, 2025 · home | W 74–63 | 261 | 117.9 | 100.4 | 62.8 | 52.9 | 15.9 | 40.6 |
| E WashingtonNov 4, 2025 · home | W 80–74 | 199 | 113.2 | 104.7 | 70.7 | 52.9 | 11.3 | 33.3 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Donovan DentG | 35 | 34.4 | 13.3 | 2.9 | 7.6 | 46.7 | 24.7% | 35 | 4.1435 games | 7135 games |
| Trent PerryG | 35 | 29.9 | 12.6 | 3.0 | 2.8 | 59.2 | 21.2% | 35 | 2.0635 games | 12035 games |
| Eric Dailey Jr.G | 35 | 27.6 | 11.6 | 5.8 | 1.3 | 55.9 | 22.5% | 35 | 1.0035 games | 9835 games |
| Tyler BilodeauF | 31 | 30.2 | 17.6 | 5.6 | 1.1 | 65.6 | 25.9% | 31 | 0.8331 games | 13831 games |
| Skyy ClarkG | 26 | 28.6 | 11.5 | 2.3 | 2.0 | 60.6 | 19.2% | 26 | 2.0826 games | 12426 games |
| Xavier BookerF | 36 | 20.2 | 7.3 | 3.5 | 0.8 | 63.2 | 17.0% | 36 | 1.1736 games | 6736 games |
| Jamar BrownG | 36 | 15.6 | 3.8 | 2.7 | 0.5 | 57.3 | 12.1% | 36 | 1.5836 games | 7436 games |
| Brandon WilliamsG | 34 | 12.2 | 2.6 | 1.9 | 0.3 | 49.1 | 12.6% | 34 | 1.3834 games | 2534 games |
| Steven Jamerson IIF | 33 | 10.2 | 2.0 | 2.1 | 0.5 | 72.5 | 10.3% | 33 | 0.7633 games | 033 games |
| Eric FreenyG | 28 | 11.0 | 2.0 | 1.6 | 0.4 | 46.8 | 11.9% | 28 | 1.3328 games | 2728 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 UCLA?
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.
14Source-listed players
12Same-program prior records
0Different-program records
87%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 | 5,264 | 5,264 | — | 100% | — |
| Forward | 4 | 1,075 | 1,075 | — | 100% | — |
| Center | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
0 listed players have no recognized source position. The workload denominator is the matched prior-production sample (6,339 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?
14 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% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Donovan Dent →G | Same programUCLA Bruins | 34.4 | 13.3 | 46.7% |
| Trent Perry →G | Same programUCLA Bruins | 29.9 | 12.6 | 59.2% |
| Eric Dailey Jr. →G | Same programUCLA Bruins | 27.6 | 11.6 | 55.9% |
| Skyy Clark →G | Same programUCLA Bruins | 28.6 | 11.5 | 60.6% |
| Xavier Booker →F | Same programUCLA Bruins | 20.2 | 7.3 | 63.2% |
| Jamar Brown →G | Same programUCLA Bruins | 15.6 | 3.8 | 57.3% |
| Brandon Williams →G | Same programUCLA Bruins | 12.2 | 2.6 | 49.1% |
| Steven Jamerson II →F | Same programUCLA Bruins | 10.2 | 2.0 | 72.5% |
| Eric Freeny →G | Same programUCLA Bruins | 11.0 | 2.0 | 46.8% |
| Anthony Peoples Jr. →F | Same programUCLA Bruins | 2.2 | 0.4 | 50.0% |
| Jack Seidler →G | Same programUCLA Bruins | 1.5 | 0.3 | 18.3% |
| Christian Horry →G | Same programUCLA Bruins | 1.8 | 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…
UCLA vs Arizona
70.4UCLA
78.4Arizona
Arizona win estimate73.8%
Model signalLean
Projected home margin8.0
Projected total148.8
80% home-margin range-8.0 to 23.9
Estimated possessions68.7
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityAway 0.5 pts
Arizona attack 55.7% · UCLA defense 48.8%UCLA attack 53.2% · Arizona defense 45.9%
Ball securityHome 2.6 pts
Arizona attack 15.5% · UCLA defense 20.1%UCLA attack 15.1% · Arizona defense 17.1%
Second chancesAway 0.2 pts
Arizona attack 36.5% · UCLA defense 29.4%UCLA attack 32.3% · Arizona defense 25.0%
Free-throw pressureHome 1.0 pts
Arizona attack 40.6% · UCLA defense 33.3%UCLA attack 34.9% · Arizona defense 28.6%
T-Mobile 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 →