A relative strength
Turnover rate
15.8% · rank 128 of 366 · 32 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
West Georgia
2025–26 performance, personnel and game context.
A starting point for 2026–27 preparation.
Independent preseason modelNo.325
-13.3 adjusted net
per 100 estimated possessions
15–172025–26 recorded finals
100.3Adjusted offense · 2026–27 baseline
113.6Adjusted defense · lower is better
69.4Model tempo · possessions / 40 min
Publisher lens / exact source team ID
A second read on West Georgia.
Checking the attributed publisher rating…
01 / Both ends of the floor
The possession profile.
15–1732 recorded games · 32 paired efficiency samples · pace 70.5Mean opponent adj. net -5.1 · 30 rated opponents
Offense
Effective FG%
50.3%32 games · higher is betterRank 259 / 366 · 29th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent effective FG%
52.5%32 games · lower is betterRank 269 / 366 · 27th favorable percentileOffense
Turnover rate
15.8%32 games · lower is betterRank 128 / 366 · 65th favorable percentileDefense
Turnovers forced
14.9%32 games · higher is betterRank 315 / 366 · 14th favorable percentileOffense
Offensive rebound rate
31.9%32 games · higher is betterRank 152 / 366 · 59th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent offensive rebound rate
29.2%32 games · lower is betterRank 143 / 366 · 61th favorable percentileOffense
Free-throw attempt rate
29.1%32 games · higher is betterRank 325 / 366 · 11th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent free-throw attempt rate
35.2%32 games · lower is betterRank 205 / 366 · 44th favorable percentileShooting and ball-movement detail
| Metric | Observed rate | Games | Definition |
|---|---|---|---|
| Offensive efficiency | 107.4 | 32 | Points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Defensive efficiency | 111.6 | 32 | Opponent points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Two-point FG% | 50.2% | 32 | (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Opponent two-point FG% | 54.2% | 32 | Opponent (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Three-point FG% | 33.6% | 32 | 3PM / 3PA. |
| Opponent three-point FG% | 33.1% | 32 | Opponent 3PM / 3PA. |
| Three-point attempt share | 33.3% | 32 | 3PA / FGA; a style measure, not a quality grade. |
| Opponent three-point attempt share | 37.2% | 32 | Opponent 3PA / FGA; a style measure. |
| Free-throw accuracy | 70.0% | 32 | FTM / FTA. |
| Opponent free-throw accuracy | 73.1% | 32 | Opponent FTM / FTA; not attributed to defensive skill. |
| Assisted field-goal share | 45.1% | 32 | Assists / FGM; describes recorded ball movement. |
| Opponent assisted FG share | 50.7% | 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?
2,290 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
Opponent offensive rebound rate
29.2% · rank 143 of 366 · 32 games
Which matchups demand an extra box-out assignment?
A closer look
Turnovers forced
14.9% · rank 315 of 366 · 32 games
Which defensive actions produce takeaways, and what shots do they concede?
A closer look
Free-throw attempt rate
29.1% · rank 325 of 366 · 32 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 6 times in the selected window; West Georgia 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 Queens · L 63–71 · offense 86.5 / defense 97.5
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% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| QueensMar 7, 2026 · neutral | L 63–71 | 205 | 86.5 | 97.5 | 72.8 | 36.8 | 19.2 | 36.7 |
| North FloridaMar 5, 2026 · neutral | W 93–85 | 321 | 123.7 | 113.1 | 75.2 | 61.3 | 16.0 | 38.7 |
| North AlabamaFeb 28, 2026 · home | W 75–63 | 290 | 109.4 | 91.9 | 68.5 | 55.2 | 20.4 | 34.5 |
| LipscombFeb 26, 2026 · home | W 84–78 | 144 | 119.1 | 110.6 | 70.6 | 62.3 | 9.9 | 17.6 |
| QueensFeb 21, 2026 · road | L 84–91 | 205 | 116.6 | 126.3 | 72.1 | 53.0 | 13.9 | 34.3 |
| E KentuckyFeb 19, 2026 · road | L 80–81 | 256 | 100.4 | 101.6 | 70.8 | 51.5 | 16.3 | 26.8 |
| C ArkansasFeb 14, 2026 · road | L 62–79 | 259 | 90.0 | 114.7 | 68.9 | 48.2 | 20.3 | 25.0 |
| North AlabamaFeb 12, 2026 · road | W 82–73 | 290 | 126.9 | 113.0 | 64.6 | 58.3 | 10.8 | 31.3 |
| JacksonvilleFeb 7, 2026 · home | W 87–73 | 287 | 128.8 | 108.1 | 67.5 | 52.5 | 11.8 | 47.2 |
| North FloridaFeb 6, 2026 · home | L 73–81 | 321 | 98.2 | 109.0 | 74.3 | 37.7 | 2.7 | 30.4 |
| Austin PeayJan 31, 2026 · home | L 78–81 | 216 | 104.5 | 108.5 | 74.7 | 47.7 | 10.7 | 21.1 |
| BellarmineJan 29, 2026 · road | L 74–77 | 317 | 119.8 | 124.7 | 61.8 | 61.2 | 16.2 | 32.3 |
| QueensJan 24, 2026 · home | W 74–66 | 205 | 110.8 | 98.9 | 66.8 | 52.6 | 18.0 | 37.1 |
| C ArkansasJan 22, 2026 · home | L 65–86 | 259 | 96.5 | 127.6 | 67.4 | 56.4 | 32.6 | 38.5 |
| FGCUJan 17, 2026 · road | L 72–90 | 219 | 102.0 | 127.5 | 70.6 | 47.7 | 12.8 | 25.6 |
| StetsonJan 16, 2026 · road | L 86–95 | 326 | 117.5 | 129.8 | 73.2 | 49.3 | 12.3 | 39.0 |
| JacksonvilleJan 10, 2026 · road | L 43–75 | 287 | 72.5 | 126.5 | 59.3 | 37.2 | 25.3 | 19.2 |
| North FloridaJan 9, 2026 · road | W 85–73 | 321 | 119.1 | 102.3 | 71.4 | 54.8 | 12.6 | 29.0 |
| E KentuckyJan 3, 2026 · home | W 88–76 | 256 | 126.4 | 109.2 | 69.6 | 56.3 | 12.9 | 40.6 |
| BellarmineJan 2, 2026 · home | W 87–85 | 317 | 126.9 | 124.0 | 68.6 | 48.6 | 7.3 | 39.1 |
| GeorgiaDec 22, 2025 · road | L 74–103 | 37 | 88.5 | 123.2 | 83.6 | 42.1 | 20.3 | 22.7 |
| Brewton ParkerDec 18, 2025 · home | W 70–49 | Unrated | 102.6 | 71.8 | 68.2 | 43.2 | 14.7 | 37.8 |
| GA SouthernDec 14, 2025 · home | L 85–91 | 244 | 116.9 | 125.2 | 72.7 | 52.4 | 23.4 | 48.6 |
| Tennessee TechDec 6, 2025 · home | L 59–87 | 315 | 84.5 | 124.6 | 69.8 | 41.1 | 20.1 | 23.7 |
| TroyDec 2, 2025 · road | W 93–89 | 123 | 108.0 | 103.4 | 68.9 | 47.1 | 5.8 | 30.9 |
| Georgia TechNov 23, 2025 · road | L 66–82 | 137 | 91.6 | 113.8 | 72.1 | 44.5 | 12.5 | 18.2 |
| SC UpstateNov 22, 2025 · home | W 72–64 | 309 | 101.2 | 90.0 | 71.2 | 49.2 | 22.5 | 40.0 |
| Tennessee TechNov 18, 2025 · road | W 61–59 | 315 | 91.3 | 88.3 | 66.8 | 38.5 | 19.5 | 32.6 |
| The CitadelNov 15, 2025 · home | W 100–92 | 355 | 131.8 | 121.2 | 75.9 | 63.1 | 11.9 | 38.7 |
| UCLANov 11, 2025 · road | L 62–83 | 27 | 95.0 | 127.1 | 65.3 | 55.9 | 26.0 | 25.8 |
| HuntingdonNov 8, 2025 · home | W 120–83 | Unrated | 145.8 | 100.8 | 82.3 | 74.0 | 14.6 | 37.5 |
| NebraskaNov 4, 2025 · road | L 53–86 | 24 | 75.2 | 121.9 | 70.5 | 32.3 | 17.0 | 26.1 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shelton Williams-DrydenF | 32 | 35.2 | 20.7 | 9.1 | 1.5 | 55.2 | 28.5% | 32 | 0.7532 games | 7232 games |
| Kolten GriffinF | 32 | 33.3 | 7.7 | 4.2 | 2.8 | 52.4 | 13.2% | 32 | 1.6532 games | 6032 games |
| Josh SmithG | 31 | 27.1 | 16.2 | 2.1 | 2.1 | 51.0 | 31.0% | 31 | 1.5331 games | 17831 games |
| Malcolm NoelG | 28 | 23.7 | 8.1 | 1.9 | 3.4 | 53.0 | 20.0% | 28 | 1.6128 games | 10328 games |
| Kenneth ChimeF | 32 | 20.3 | 5.0 | 5.9 | 0.3 | 56.0 | 12.4% | 32 | 0.5032 games | 032 games |
| JaVar DanielF | 31 | 19.2 | 7.4 | 5.3 | 0.7 | 56.7 | 18.1% | 31 | 1.1131 games | 1831 games |
| Brady HardewigG | 31 | 17.3 | 3.9 | 1.3 | 0.8 | 55.6 | 11.4% | 31 | 1.4731 games | 9031 games |
| Matija ŽužicG | 23 | 16.0 | 4.0 | 2.4 | 0.7 | 41.6 | 17.3% | 23 | 0.8923 games | 6323 games |
| Chas LewlessG | 10 | 28.3 | 12.8 | 2.9 | 2.9 | 51.9 | 24.9% | 10 | 1.2110 games | 6410 games |
| Xavier ShegogF | 31 | 8.7 | 1.5 | 1.8 | 0.3 | 44.7 | 13.2% | 31 | 0.3631 games | 831 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 West Georgia?
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.
16Source-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 | 9 | 2,768 | 2,768 | — | 100% | — |
| Forward | 7 | 3,708 | 3,708 | — | 100% | — |
| Center | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
0 listed players have no recognized source position. The workload denominator is the matched prior-production sample (6,476 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?
16 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% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shelton Williams-Dryden →F | Same programWest Georgia Wolves | 35.2 | 20.7 | 55.2% |
| Kolten Griffin →F | Same programWest Georgia Wolves | 33.3 | 7.7 | 52.4% |
| Josh Smith →G | Same programWest Georgia Wolves | 27.1 | 16.2 | 51.0% |
| Malcolm Noel →G | Same programWest Georgia Wolves | 23.7 | 8.1 | 53.0% |
| Kenneth Chime →F | Same programWest Georgia Wolves | 20.3 | 5.0 | 56.0% |
| JaVar Daniel →F | Same programWest Georgia Wolves | 19.2 | 7.4 | 56.7% |
| Brady Hardewig →G | Same programWest Georgia Wolves | 17.3 | 3.9 | 55.6% |
| Matija Žužic →G | Same programWest Georgia Wolves | 16.0 | 4.0 | 41.6% |
| Chas Lewless →G | Same programWest Georgia Wolves | 28.3 | 12.8 | 51.9% |
| Xavier Shegog →F | Same programWest Georgia Wolves | 8.7 | 1.5 | 44.7% |
| Eric Baldassarre →G | Same programWest Georgia Wolves | 4.4 | 2.2 | 80.0% |
| Cameron Merritt →G | Same programWest Georgia Wolves | 3.2 | 1.0 | 66.7% |
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…
West Georgia vs DePaul
65.1West Georgia
79.4DePaul
DePaul win estimate84.9%
Model signalStrong lean
Projected home margin14.3
Projected total144.6
80% home-margin range-1.6 to 30.2
Estimated possessions69.0
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityHome 0.2 pts
DePaul attack 51.5% · West Georgia defense 53.8%West Georgia attack 48.4% · DePaul defense 50.9%
Ball securityAway 2.8 pts
DePaul attack 17.9% · West Georgia defense 15.8%West Georgia attack 16.7% · DePaul defense 17.4%
Second chancesAway 0.7 pts
DePaul attack 28.1% · West Georgia defense 29.5%West Georgia attack 28.8% · DePaul defense 29.6%
Free-throw pressureAway 0.9 pts
DePaul attack 34.2% · West Georgia defense 38.2%West Georgia attack 31.5% · DePaul defense 34.7%
Wintrust Arena
Preseason baseline · roster changes are not model features.
No verified pregame market line imported. Check the forecast record →
West Georgia vs Loyola Chicago
67.2West Georgia
77.6Loyola Chicago
Loyola Chicago win estimate78.6%
Model signalStrong lean
Projected home margin10.4
Projected total144.8
80% home-margin range-5.5 to 26.3
Estimated possessions68.4
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityAway 0.2 pts
Loyola Chicago attack 51.9% · West Georgia defense 53.8%West Georgia attack 48.4% · Loyola Chicago defense 50.1%
Ball securityAway 2.0 pts
Loyola Chicago attack 18.8% · West Georgia defense 15.8%West Georgia attack 16.7% · Loyola Chicago defense 15.6%
Second chancesAway 1.0 pts
Loyola Chicago attack 29.0% · West Georgia defense 29.5%West Georgia attack 28.8% · Loyola Chicago defense 28.3%
Free-throw pressureAway 0.2 pts
Loyola Chicago attack 34.5% · West Georgia defense 38.2%West Georgia attack 31.5% · Loyola Chicago defense 35.0%
Gentile Arena
Preseason baseline · roster changes are not model features.
No verified pregame market line imported. Check the forecast record →
West Georgia vs Charleston So
72.3West Georgia
79.4Charleston So
Charleston So win estimate71.9%
Model signalLean
Projected home margin7.1
Projected total151.8
80% home-margin range-8.8 to 23.0
Estimated possessions71.4
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityAway 1.2 pts
Charleston So attack 50.5% · West Georgia defense 53.8%West Georgia attack 48.4% · Charleston So defense 50.5%
Ball securityHome 0.2 pts
Charleston So attack 18.4% · West Georgia defense 15.8%West Georgia attack 16.7% · Charleston So defense 13.9%
Second chancesHome 0.0 pts
Charleston So attack 29.3% · West Georgia defense 29.5%West Georgia attack 28.8% · Charleston So defense 29.1%
Free-throw pressureHome 0.8 pts
Charleston So attack 34.3% · West Georgia defense 38.2%West Georgia attack 31.5% · Charleston So defense 36.2%
Buccaneer Fieldhouse
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 →