A relative strength
Free-throw attempt rate
43.6% · rank 11 of 366 · 35 games
Who generates contact, and how do opponents keep them off the line?
← Program librarySource edition Sep 12, 2026
The program dossier / men’s basketball
Kennesaw St
2025–26 performance, personnel and game context.
A starting point for 2026–27 preparation.
Independent preseason modelNo.159
+0.7 adjusted net
per 100 estimated possessions
21–142025–26 recorded finals
107.8Adjusted offense · 2026–27 baseline
107.1Adjusted defense · lower is better
71.4Model tempo · possessions / 40 min
Publisher lens / exact source team ID
A second read on Kennesaw St.
Checking the attributed publisher rating…
01 / Both ends of the floor
The possession profile.
21–1435 recorded games · 35 paired efficiency samples · pace 72.3Mean opponent adj. net 0.2 · 32 rated opponents
Offense
Effective FG%
51.9%35 games · higher is betterRank 179 / 366 · 51th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent effective FG%
46.9%35 games · lower is betterRank 25 / 366 · 93th favorable percentileOffense
Turnover rate
16.3%35 games · lower is betterRank 158 / 366 · 57th favorable percentileDefense
Turnovers forced
16.6%35 games · higher is betterRank 196 / 366 · 47th favorable percentileOffense
Offensive rebound rate
36.3%35 games · higher is betterRank 31 / 366 · 92th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent offensive rebound rate
30.3%35 games · lower is betterRank 196 / 366 · 47th favorable percentileOffense
Free-throw attempt rate
43.6%35 games · higher is betterRank 11 / 366 · 97th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent free-throw attempt rate
45.1%35 games · lower is betterRank 355 / 366 · 3th favorable percentileShooting and ball-movement detail
| Metric | Observed rate | Games | Definition |
|---|---|---|---|
| Offensive efficiency | 113.6 | 35 | Points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Defensive efficiency | 104.3 | 35 | Opponent points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Two-point FG% | 51.8% | 35 | (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Opponent two-point FG% | 45.4% | 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 | 43.1% | 35 | 3PA / FGA; a style measure, not a quality grade. |
| Opponent three-point attempt share | 37.7% | 35 | Opponent 3PA / FGA; a style measure. |
| Free-throw accuracy | 69.2% | 35 | FTM / FTA. |
| Opponent free-throw accuracy | 74.7% | 35 | Opponent FTM / FTA; not attributed to defensive skill. |
| Assisted field-goal share | 51.2% | 35 | Assists / FGM; describes recorded ball movement. |
| Opponent assisted FG share | 48.9% | 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?
2,483 source possession rows across 34 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 effective FG%
46.9% · rank 25 of 366 · 35 games
What coverages and lineups account for the shot quality opponents receive?
A closer look
Opponent offensive rebound rate
30.3% · rank 196 of 366 · 35 games
Which matchups demand an extra box-out assignment?
A closer look
Opponent free-throw attempt rate
45.1% · rank 355 of 366 · 35 games
Which defenders can protect the paint without surrendering free throws?
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 10 times in the selected window; Kennesaw St 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 20, 2026 · neutral vs Gonzaga · L 64–73 · offense 92.6 / defense 105.6
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% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GonzagaMar 20, 2026 · neutral | L 64–73 | 8 | 92.6 | 105.6 | 69.1 | 38.8 | 15.9 | 27.5 |
| Louisiana TechMar 15, 2026 · neutral | W 71–60 | 156 | 110.1 | 93.1 | 64.5 | 47.4 | 12.4 | 38.9 |
| Sam HoustonMar 13, 2026 · neutral | W 79–73 | 127 | 113.4 | 104.8 | 69.7 | 56.7 | 23.0 | 36.7 |
| Western KYMar 13, 2026 · neutral | W 96–87 | 157 | 124.6 | 113.0 | 77.0 | 55.9 | 13.0 | 33.3 |
| New Mexico StMar 7, 2026 · road | L 76–79 | 169 | 112.5 | 116.9 | 67.6 | 50.9 | 13.3 | 27.8 |
| UTEPMar 6, 2026 · road | L 71–78 | 230 | 94.7 | 104.1 | 74.9 | 36.2 | 17.3 | 36.0 |
| DelawareFeb 28, 2026 · home | W 90–82 | 251 | 129.4 | 117.9 | 69.5 | 66.7 | 17.3 | 37.5 |
| LibertyFeb 27, 2026 · home | W 74–65 | 96 | 116.9 | 102.7 | 63.3 | 60.9 | 19.0 | 33.3 |
| Louisiana TechFeb 21, 2026 · home | W 58–55 | 156 | 85.6 | 81.1 | 67.8 | 41.2 | 19.2 | 28.2 |
| Missouri StFeb 19, 2026 · road | W 91–87 | 186 | 125.8 | 120.3 | 72.3 | 60.7 | 12.4 | 29.4 |
| Sam HoustonFeb 14, 2026 · home | L 79–83 | 127 | 119.3 | 125.4 | 66.2 | 55.7 | 13.6 | 36.7 |
| MTSUFeb 12, 2026 · home | L 87–90 | 164 | 124.0 | 128.3 | 70.1 | 59.7 | 11.4 | 29.4 |
| Jax StateFeb 8, 2026 · road | L 58–77 | 173 | 87.6 | 116.3 | 66.2 | 37.5 | 16.6 | 29.5 |
| New Mexico StJan 31, 2026 · home | W 76–53 | 169 | 113.7 | 79.3 | 66.9 | 49.0 | 12.0 | 33.3 |
| Western KYJan 29, 2026 · home | W 72–69 | 157 | 101.3 | 97.1 | 71.1 | 50.0 | 18.3 | 31.4 |
| Louisiana TechJan 23, 2026 · road | L 76–82 | 156 | 116.0 | 125.1 | 65.5 | 50.0 | 13.7 | 36.1 |
| Sam HoustonJan 22, 2026 · road | L 87–93 | 127 | 118.3 | 126.5 | 73.5 | 50.7 | 10.9 | 35.6 |
| Western KYJan 17, 2026 · road | W 81–65 | 157 | 112.0 | 89.8 | 72.4 | 50.0 | 15.2 | 31.6 |
| FIUJan 15, 2026 · home | W 89–86 | 229 | 120.6 | 116.5 | 73.8 | 55.4 | 14.9 | 37.2 |
| Jax StateJan 10, 2026 · home | W 88–82 | 173 | 121.4 | 113.1 | 72.5 | 55.3 | 13.8 | 33.3 |
| Missouri StJan 8, 2026 · home | W 90–80 | 186 | 120.9 | 107.4 | 74.5 | 62.5 | 24.2 | 35.7 |
| DelawareJan 4, 2026 · road | L 52–67 | 251 | 81.4 | 104.9 | 63.9 | 34.2 | 20.3 | 34.9 |
| LibertyJan 3, 2026 · road | L 73–81 | 96 | 99.6 | 110.5 | 73.3 | 40.0 | 17.7 | 46.3 |
| AlabamaDec 21, 2025 · neutral | L 81–92 | 12 | 102.9 | 116.8 | 78.7 | 48.6 | 20.3 | 34.9 |
| MTSUDec 18, 2025 · road | L 67–68 | 164 | 96.6 | 98.1 | 69.3 | 38.9 | 18.8 | 42.9 |
| S WesleyanDec 8, 2025 · home | W 121–66 | Unrated | 160.6 | 87.6 | 75.4 | 67.9 | 9.3 | 55.6 |
| Georgia StDec 6, 2025 · home | W 92–69 | 293 | 109.2 | 81.9 | 84.2 | 60.7 | 22.6 | 27.3 |
| Jackson StDec 3, 2025 · home | W 88–73 | 345 | 121.1 | 100.5 | 72.7 | 46.3 | 12.4 | 50.0 |
| FGCUNov 27, 2025 · road | W 102–100 | 219 | 117.5 | 115.2 | 77.2 | 57.9 | 21.9 | 36.1 |
| Oral RobertsNov 25, 2025 · neutral | L 83–91 | 300 | 107.1 | 117.5 | 77.5 | 50.8 | 19.4 | 33.3 |
| RiceNov 24, 2025 · neutral | W 89–84 | 224 | 110.4 | 104.2 | 71.7 | 47.1 | 16.1 | 38.6 |
| South FloridaNov 16, 2025 · home | L 89–108 | 76 | 111.7 | 135.5 | 79.7 | 45.1 | 17.6 | 46.0 |
| PointNov 13, 2025 · home | W 111–60 | Unrated | 137.1 | 74.1 | 81.0 | 60.1 | 11.1 | 50.0 |
| Florida A&MNov 8, 2025 · road | W 92–72 | 335 | 114.3 | 89.5 | 80.5 | 63.2 | 17.4 | 17.9 |
| PaineNov 4, 2025 · home | W 105–29 | Unrated | 134.3 | 37.1 | 78.2 | 65.9 | 15.4 | 34.2 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RJ JohnsonG | 34 | 28.1 | 14.5 | 3.1 | 4.0 | 55.2 | 25.3% | 34 | 2.1134 games | 13034 games |
| Braedan LueF | 35 | 26.6 | 10.9 | 5.3 | 1.2 | 51.7 | 21.2% | 35 | 0.8235 games | 8635 games |
| Trey SimpsonF | 35 | 25.6 | 9.0 | 4.9 | 0.6 | 56.5 | 16.8% | 35 | 0.4835 games | 16935 games |
| Frankquon ShermanF | 35 | 25.2 | 10.4 | 8.5 | 1.0 | 57.3 | 19.2% | 35 | 0.7735 games | 8735 games |
| Kaden RickardG | 35 | 19.9 | 5.8 | 2.6 | 2.3 | 48.8 | 17.7% | 35 | 1.4435 games | 6135 games |
| Amir TaylorF | 33 | 17.2 | 7.5 | 3.6 | 0.9 | 62.7 | 18.9% | 33 | 0.9733 games | 3733 games |
| Simeon CottleG | 17 | 30.4 | 20.2 | 2.5 | 3.8 | 60.4 | 28.0% | 17 | 1.4917 games | 14617 games |
| Jaden HarrisG | 20 | 24.3 | 7.6 | 1.8 | 0.9 | 53.0 | 16.5% | 20 | 0.9520 games | 10320 games |
| Ramone SealsF | 22 | 17.8 | 7.6 | 4.2 | 0.5 | 55.5 | 19.5% | 22 | 0.6322 games | 6722 games |
| Darius Washington IIIG | 24 | 15.1 | 5.2 | 2.2 | 1.6 | 51.9 | 17.7% | 24 | 1.7724 games | 3124 games |
| Perry Smith Jr.C | 26 | 11.8 | 3.0 | 2.5 | 0.7 | 61.8 | 11.6% | 26 | 1.1326 games | 126 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 Kennesaw St?
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.
19Source-listed players
15Same-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 | 10 | 3,061 | 3,061 | — | 100% | — |
| Forward | 8 | 3,685 | 3,685 | — | 100% | — |
| Center | 1 | 306 | 306 | — | 100% | — |
0 listed players have no recognized source position. The workload denominator is the matched prior-production sample (7,052 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?
19 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% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RJ Johnson →G | Same programKennesaw State Owls | 28.1 | 14.5 | 55.2% |
| Braedan Lue →F | Same programKennesaw State Owls | 26.6 | 10.9 | 51.7% |
| Trey Simpson →F | Same programKennesaw State Owls | 25.6 | 9.0 | 56.5% |
| Frankquon Sherman →F | Same programKennesaw State Owls | 25.2 | 10.4 | 57.3% |
| Kaden Rickard →G | Same programKennesaw State Owls | 19.9 | 5.8 | 48.8% |
| Amir Taylor →F | Same programKennesaw State Owls | 17.2 | 7.5 | 62.7% |
| Simeon Cottle →G | Same programKennesaw State Owls | 30.4 | 20.2 | 60.4% |
| Jaden Harris →G | Same programKennesaw State Owls | 24.3 | 7.6 | 53.0% |
| Ramone Seals →F | Same programKennesaw State Owls | 17.8 | 7.6 | 55.5% |
| Darius Washington III →G | Same programKennesaw State Owls | 15.1 | 5.2 | 51.9% |
| Perry Smith Jr. →C | Same programKennesaw State Owls | 11.8 | 3.0 | 61.8% |
| Eric Holland →G | Same programKennesaw State Owls | 3.1 | 1.5 | 45.2% |
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…
Kennesaw St vs Alabama
75.1Kennesaw St
98.2Alabama
Alabama win estimate93.7%
Model signalStrong lean
Projected home margin23.1
Projected total173.3
80% home-margin range7.2 to 39.0
Estimated possessions76.8
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityHome 2.8 pts
Alabama attack 57.1% · Kennesaw St defense 50.1%Kennesaw St attack 50.9% · Alabama defense 46.7%
Ball securityHome 3.8 pts
Alabama attack 15.2% · Kennesaw St defense 16.6%Kennesaw St attack 17.5% · Alabama defense 15.1%
Second chancesHome 0.8 pts
Alabama attack 34.0% · Kennesaw St defense 29.1%Kennesaw St attack 32.0% · Alabama defense 27.9%
Free-throw pressureAway 13.2 pts
Alabama attack 38.1% · Kennesaw St defense 44.1%Kennesaw St attack 40.2% · Alabama defense 33.0%
Coleman Coliseum
Preseason baseline · roster changes are not model features.
No verified pregame market line imported. Check the forecast record →
Western KY vs Kennesaw St
77.1Western KY
80.8Kennesaw St
Kennesaw St win estimate63.6%
Model signalLean
Projected home margin3.6
Projected total157.9
80% home-margin range-12.3 to 19.5
Estimated possessions74.5
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityHome 1.4 pts
Kennesaw St attack 50.9% · Western KY defense 50.2%Western KY attack 49.4% · Kennesaw St defense 50.1%
Ball securityAway 1.2 pts
Kennesaw St attack 17.5% · Western KY defense 17.3%Western KY attack 15.6% · Kennesaw St defense 16.6%
Second chancesHome 4.5 pts
Kennesaw St attack 32.0% · Western KY defense 28.4%Western KY attack 28.2% · Kennesaw St defense 29.1%
Free-throw pressureHome 7.9 pts
Kennesaw St attack 40.2% · Western KY defense 40.9%Western KY attack 35.4% · Kennesaw St defense 44.1%
VyStar Arena
Preseason baseline · roster changes are not model features.
No verified pregame market line imported. Check the forecast record →
MTSU vs Kennesaw St
73.4MTSU
77.3Kennesaw St
Kennesaw St win estimate64.1%
Model signalLean
Projected home margin3.8
Projected total150.7
80% home-margin range-12.1 to 19.8
Estimated possessions70.5
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityAway 0.7 pts
Kennesaw St attack 50.9% · MTSU defense 50.6%MTSU attack 51.0% · Kennesaw St defense 50.1%
Ball securityAway 0.4 pts
Kennesaw St attack 17.5% · MTSU defense 16.4%MTSU attack 17.3% · Kennesaw St defense 16.6%
Second chancesHome 2.9 pts
Kennesaw St attack 32.0% · MTSU defense 27.9%MTSU attack 30.3% · Kennesaw St defense 29.1%
Free-throw pressureHome 18.1 pts
Kennesaw St attack 40.2% · MTSU defense 33.9%MTSU attack 32.3% · Kennesaw St defense 44.1%
VyStar 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 →