A relative strength
Opponent free-throw attempt rate
19.7% · rank 1 of 366 · 37 games
Which defenders can protect the paint without surrendering free throws?
← Program librarySource edition Sep 12, 2026
The program dossier / men’s basketball
Illinois
2025–26 performance, personnel and game context.
A starting point for 2026–27 preparation.
Independent preseason modelNo.7
+27.8 adjusted net
per 100 estimated possessions
28–92025–26 recorded finals
124.6Adjusted offense · 2026–27 baseline
96.8Adjusted defense · lower is better
68.6Model tempo · possessions / 40 min
Publisher lens / exact source team ID
A second read on Illinois.
Checking the attributed publisher rating…
01 / Both ends of the floor
The possession profile.
28–937 recorded games · 37 paired efficiency samples · pace 65.7Mean opponent adj. net 13.5 · 37 rated opponents
Offense
Effective FG%
54.7%37 games · higher is betterRank 59 / 366 · 84th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent effective FG%
47.3%37 games · lower is betterRank 34 / 366 · 91th favorable percentileOffense
Turnover rate
13.1%37 games · lower is betterRank 10 / 366 · 98th favorable percentileDefense
Turnovers forced
11.6%37 games · higher is betterRank 366 / 366 · 0th favorable percentileOffense
Offensive rebound rate
39.2%37 games · higher is betterRank 3 / 366 · 99th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent offensive rebound rate
26.7%37 games · lower is betterRank 41 / 366 · 89th favorable percentileOffense
Free-throw attempt rate
33.2%37 games · higher is betterRank 228 / 366 · 38th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent free-throw attempt rate
19.7%37 games · lower is betterRank 1 / 366 · 100th favorable percentileShooting and ball-movement detail
| Metric | Observed rate | Games | Definition |
|---|---|---|---|
| Offensive efficiency | 125.0 | 37 | Points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Defensive efficiency | 103.3 | 37 | Opponent points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Two-point FG% | 57.5% | 37 | (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Opponent two-point FG% | 47.7% | 37 | Opponent (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Three-point FG% | 34.5% | 37 | 3PM / 3PA. |
| Opponent three-point FG% | 31.3% | 37 | Opponent 3PM / 3PA. |
| Three-point attempt share | 49.7% | 37 | 3PA / FGA; a style measure, not a quality grade. |
| Opponent three-point attempt share | 43.4% | 37 | Opponent 3PA / FGA; a style measure. |
| Free-throw accuracy | 78.0% | 37 | FTM / FTA. |
| Opponent free-throw accuracy | 73.8% | 37 | Opponent FTM / FTA; not attributed to defensive skill. |
| Assisted field-goal share | 50.0% | 37 | Assists / FGM; describes recorded ball movement. |
| Opponent assisted FG share | 52.0% | 37 | 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?
2,439 source possession rows across 37 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
Offensive rebound rate
39.2% · rank 3 of 366 · 37 games
Who crashes the glass, and how does that affect transition defense?
A closer look
Free-throw attempt rate
33.2% · rank 228 of 366 · 37 games
Who generates contact, and how do opponents keep them off the line?
A closer look
Turnovers forced
11.6% · rank 366 of 366 · 37 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 7 times in the selected window; Illinois won 1. 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
Apr 4, 2026 · neutral vs UConn · L 62–71 · offense 97.6 / defense 111.8
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 · 37 games
| Game / venue | Result | Current opponent rank | Off. eff. | Def. eff. | Pace | eFG% | TO% | ORB% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UConnApr 4, 2026 · neutral | L 62–71 | 10 | 97.6 | 111.8 | 63.5 | 39.3 | 12.6 | 30.8 |
| IowaMar 28, 2026 · neutral | W 71–59 | 28 | 129.5 | 107.6 | 54.8 | 50.0 | 14.6 | 55.2 |
| HoustonMar 27, 2026 · neutral | W 65–55 | 2 | 111.2 | 94.1 | 58.5 | 52.0 | 15.4 | 34.3 |
| VCUMar 22, 2026 · neutral | W 76–55 | 39 | 115.2 | 83.4 | 66.0 | 56.0 | 16.7 | 41.4 |
| PennMar 20, 2026 · neutral | W 105–70 | 203 | 154.5 | 103.0 | 68.0 | 60.1 | 4.4 | 52.6 |
| WisconsinMar 13, 2026 · neutral | L 88–91 | 21 | 117.0 | 121.0 | 66.8 | 56.4 | 8.0 | 25.7 |
| MarylandMar 8, 2026 · road | W 78–72 | 63 | 127.4 | 117.6 | 61.2 | 51.8 | 11.4 | 38.7 |
| OregonMar 4, 2026 · home | W 80–54 | 61 | 116.9 | 78.9 | 68.5 | 47.9 | 8.8 | 34.1 |
| MichiganFeb 28, 2026 · home | L 70–84 | 6 | 105.4 | 126.5 | 66.4 | 48.4 | 15.1 | 34.3 |
| UCLAFeb 22, 2026 · road | L 94–95 | 27 | 129.0 | 130.4 | 64.8 | 50.0 | 12.3 | 51.3 |
| USCFeb 19, 2026 · road | W 101–65 | 72 | 141.4 | 91.0 | 71.4 | 62.1 | 12.6 | 43.3 |
| IndianaFeb 15, 2026 · home | W 71–51 | 44 | 125.5 | 90.1 | 56.6 | 49.2 | 3.5 | 41.7 |
| WisconsinFeb 11, 2026 · home | L 90–92 | 21 | 122.7 | 125.4 | 65.2 | 65.8 | 17.7 | 27.6 |
| Michigan StFeb 8, 2026 · road | L 82–85 | 13 | 115.2 | 119.4 | 63.3 | 43.7 | 5.6 | 31.3 |
| NorthwesternFeb 5, 2026 · home | W 84–44 | 53 | 132.8 | 69.5 | 63.3 | 62.9 | 17.4 | 39.3 |
| NebraskaFeb 1, 2026 · road | W 78–69 | 24 | 123.1 | 108.9 | 63.4 | 52.8 | 12.6 | 34.4 |
| WashingtonJan 30, 2026 · home | W 75–66 | 66 | 122.5 | 107.8 | 61.2 | 51.6 | 8.2 | 37.8 |
| PurdueJan 24, 2026 · road | W 88–82 | 9 | 138.9 | 129.5 | 63.3 | 64.3 | 15.8 | 44.8 |
| MarylandJan 22, 2026 · home | W 89–70 | 63 | 131.0 | 103.0 | 67.9 | 55.6 | 10.3 | 40.5 |
| MinnesotaJan 17, 2026 · home | W 77–67 | 91 | 124.7 | 108.5 | 61.7 | 51.7 | 16.2 | 45.9 |
| NorthwesternJan 15, 2026 · road | W 79–68 | 53 | 132.9 | 114.4 | 59.4 | 56.3 | 13.5 | 45.2 |
| IowaJan 11, 2026 · road | W 75–69 | 28 | 113.6 | 104.5 | 66.0 | 57.9 | 18.2 | 30.0 |
| RutgersJan 9, 2026 · home | W 81–55 | 107 | 125.8 | 85.4 | 64.4 | 53.4 | 10.9 | 34.3 |
| Penn StateJan 4, 2026 · road | W 73–65 | 103 | 108.2 | 96.3 | 67.5 | 44.6 | 14.8 | 36.1 |
| SouthernDec 29, 2025 · home | W 90–55 | 282 | 139.2 | 85.0 | 64.7 | 63.8 | 21.6 | 55.2 |
| MissouriDec 23, 2025 · neutral | W 91–48 | 49 | 146.0 | 77.0 | 62.3 | 64.7 | 17.7 | 55.6 |
| NebraskaDec 13, 2025 · home | L 80–83 | 24 | 126.7 | 131.4 | 63.2 | 56.9 | 12.7 | 40.6 |
| Ohio StateDec 10, 2025 · road | W 88–80 | 25 | 126.5 | 115.0 | 69.6 | 54.6 | 12.9 | 28.1 |
| TennesseeDec 7, 2025 · neutral | W 75–62 | 11 | 121.8 | 100.6 | 61.6 | 57.8 | 9.7 | 32.4 |
| UConnNov 28, 2025 · neutral | L 61–74 | 10 | 92.0 | 111.6 | 66.3 | 36.7 | 15.1 | 31.0 |
| UT Rio GrandeNov 25, 2025 · home | W 87–73 | 198 | 124.2 | 104.2 | 70.0 | 56.7 | 14.3 | 29.0 |
| Long IslandNov 22, 2025 · home | W 98–58 | 269 | 137.6 | 81.4 | 71.2 | 66.9 | 16.8 | 50.0 |
| AlabamaNov 20, 2025 · neutral | L 86–90 | 12 | 109.3 | 114.4 | 78.7 | 50.0 | 14.0 | 33.3 |
| ColgateNov 15, 2025 · home | W 84–65 | 209 | 125.7 | 97.3 | 66.8 | 45.7 | 10.5 | 45.2 |
| Texas TechNov 12, 2025 · home | W 81–77 | 16 | 112.6 | 107.1 | 71.9 | 55.1 | 18.1 | 32.4 |
| FGCUNov 8, 2025 · home | W 113–70 | 219 | 150.8 | 93.4 | 74.9 | 63.8 | 9.3 | 39.3 |
| Jackson StNov 4, 2025 · home | W 113–55 | 345 | 149.6 | 72.8 | 75.5 | 66.4 | 15.9 | 58.3 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Keaton WaglerG | 37 | 34.0 | 17.9 | 5.1 | 4.2 | 59.6 | 25.2% | 37 | 2.3837 games | 21937 games |
| David MirkovicF | 37 | 29.5 | 13.3 | 8.0 | 2.6 | 59.2 | 22.7% | 37 | 1.3637 games | 15237 games |
| Kylan BoswellG | 30 | 30.0 | 12.3 | 4.0 | 3.0 | 55.9 | 20.2% | 30 | 2.7330 games | 11430 games |
| Andrej StojakovicG | 34 | 26.3 | 13.5 | 4.5 | 1.0 | 57.8 | 25.1% | 34 | 0.7734 games | 8234 games |
| Tomislav IvisicC | 34 | 25.4 | 10.4 | 5.6 | 1.6 | 59.7 | 20.4% | 34 | 1.1534 games | 16034 games |
| Ben HumrichousF | 37 | 22.5 | 5.8 | 3.9 | 0.8 | 55.6 | 12.3% | 37 | 4.2937 games | 15837 games |
| Jake DavisF | 37 | 19.6 | 5.4 | 2.2 | 0.7 | 62.5 | 11.5% | 37 | 4.1737 games | 13337 games |
| Zvonimir IvisicC | 37 | 17.2 | 6.4 | 4.5 | 0.3 | 60.8 | 16.9% | 37 | 0.5637 games | 10037 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 Illinois?
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.
11Source-listed players
10Same-program prior records
0Different-program records
60%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 | 6 | 1,146 | 1,146 | — | 100% | — |
| Forward | 3 | 1,862 | 1,862 | — | 100% | — |
| Center | 2 | 1,501 | 1,501 | — | 100% | — |
0 listed players have no recognized source position. The workload denominator is the matched prior-production sample (4,509 minutes).
Dated school publications
7 announced additions
| Player | Evidence | Prior program | Prior MPG | Prior PPG | Latest publication |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lincoln WilliamsPrep addition | Addition announced ↗Illinois announced the signing of Lincoln Williams for its 2026–27 additions. | Kankakee High School | — | — | Jun 8, 20261 dated record |
| Stefan Vaaks →College transfer | Addition announced ↗Illinois announced the signing of Stefan Vaaks for its 2026–27 additions. | ProvidenceProvidence · 2025–26 | 31.5 | 15.8 | May 1, 20261 dated record |
| Quentin ColemanPrep addition | Addition announced ↗Illinois announced the signing of Quentin Coleman for its 2026–27 additions. | Principia School | — | — | Apr 19, 20261 dated record |
| Zavier ZensPrep addition | Addition announced ↗Illinois announced the signing of Zavier Zens for its 2026–27 additions. | Wisconsin Lutheran High School | — | — | Apr 17, 20261 dated record |
| Lucas MorilloPrep addition | Addition announced ↗Illinois announced the signing of Lucas Morillo for its 2026–27 additions. | The Newman School | — | — | Nov 20, 20251 dated record |
| Ethan BrownPrep addition | Addition announced ↗Illinois announced the signing of Ethan Brown for its 2026–27 additions. | Rolla High School | — | — | Nov 15, 20251 dated record |
| Landon DavisPrep addition | Addition announced ↗Illinois announced the signing of Landon Davis for its 2026–27 additions. | Waukee Northwest High School | — | — | Nov 12, 20251 dated record |
Roster observation
Who is listed in the source release?
11 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% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| David Mirkovic →F | Same programIllinois Fighting Illini | 29.5 | 13.3 | 59.2% |
| Andrej Stojakovic →G | Same programIllinois Fighting Illini | 26.3 | 13.5 | 57.8% |
| Tomislav Ivisic →C | Same programIllinois Fighting Illini | 25.4 | 10.4 | 59.7% |
| Jake Davis →F | Same programIllinois Fighting Illini | 19.6 | 5.4 | 62.5% |
| Zvonimir Ivisic →C | Same programIllinois Fighting Illini | 17.2 | 6.4 | 60.8% |
| Mihailo Petrovic →G | Same programIllinois Fighting Illini | 6.1 | 1.7 | 39.9% |
| Brandon Lee →G | Same programIllinois Fighting Illini | 4.8 | 1.9 | 59.7% |
| Jason Jakstys →F | Same programIllinois Fighting Illini | 5.2 | 1.3 | 76.4% |
| Blake Fagbemi →G | Same programIllinois Fighting Illini | 3.5 | 0.2 | 20.0% |
| AJ Redd →G | Same programIllinois Fighting Illini | 2.4 | 1.4 | 54.2% |
| Ty Rodgers →G | No prior appearance observedNo prior program listed | — | — | — |
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…
Illinois vs Duke
71.1Illinois
79.0Duke
Duke win estimate73.6%
Model signalLean
Projected home margin7.9
Projected total150.1
80% home-margin range-8.1 to 23.8
Estimated possessions67.2
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityHome 1.3 pts
Duke attack 57.1% · Illinois defense 46.3%Illinois attack 54.8% · Duke defense 45.4%
Ball securityAway 4.8 pts
Duke attack 15.7% · Illinois defense 13.9%Illinois attack 14.6% · Duke defense 17.6%
Second chancesAway 1.3 pts
Duke attack 36.2% · Illinois defense 25.7%Illinois attack 36.9% · Duke defense 25.1%
Free-throw pressureHome 2.1 pts
Duke attack 37.0% · Illinois defense 24.9%Illinois attack 36.1% · Duke defense 26.0%
Cameron Indoor Stadium
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 →