A relative strength
Opponent free-throw attempt rate
25.4% · rank 11 of 366 · 31 games
Which defenders can protect the paint without surrendering free throws?
← Program librarySource edition Sep 12, 2026
The program dossier / men’s basketball
Yale
2025–26 performance, personnel and game context.
A starting point for 2026–27 preparation.
Independent preseason modelNo.62
+11.1 adjusted net
per 100 estimated possessions
24–72025–26 recorded finals
116.1Adjusted offense · 2026–27 baseline
105.0Adjusted defense · lower is better
66.7Model tempo · possessions / 40 min
Publisher lens / exact source team ID
A second read on Yale.
Checking the attributed publisher rating…
01 / Both ends of the floor
The possession profile.
24–731 recorded games · 31 paired efficiency samples · pace 66.0Mean opponent adj. net -1.0 · 29 rated opponents
Offense
Effective FG%
56.4%31 games · higher is betterRank 21 / 366 · 95th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent effective FG%
51.0%31 games · lower is betterRank 187 / 366 · 49th favorable percentileOffense
Turnover rate
13.9%31 games · lower is betterRank 20 / 366 · 95th favorable percentileDefense
Turnovers forced
16.6%31 games · higher is betterRank 199 / 366 · 46th favorable percentileOffense
Offensive rebound rate
34.0%31 games · higher is betterRank 79 / 366 · 79th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent offensive rebound rate
29.1%31 games · lower is betterRank 139 / 366 · 62th favorable percentileOffense
Free-throw attempt rate
34.3%31 games · higher is betterRank 202 / 366 · 45th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent free-throw attempt rate
25.4%31 games · lower is betterRank 11 / 366 · 97th favorable percentileShooting and ball-movement detail
| Metric | Observed rate | Games | Definition |
|---|---|---|---|
| Offensive efficiency | 121.6 | 31 | Points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Defensive efficiency | 106.0 | 31 | Opponent points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Two-point FG% | 54.6% | 31 | (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Opponent two-point FG% | 49.9% | 31 | Opponent (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Three-point FG% | 39.6% | 31 | 3PM / 3PA. |
| Opponent three-point FG% | 34.9% | 31 | Opponent 3PM / 3PA. |
| Three-point attempt share | 36.4% | 31 | 3PA / FGA; a style measure, not a quality grade. |
| Opponent three-point attempt share | 45.4% | 31 | Opponent 3PA / FGA; a style measure. |
| Free-throw accuracy | 74.4% | 31 | FTM / FTA. |
| Opponent free-throw accuracy | 72.0% | 31 | Opponent FTM / FTA; not attributed to defensive skill. |
| Assisted field-goal share | 56.7% | 31 | Assists / FGM; describes recorded ball movement. |
| Opponent assisted FG share | 53.4% | 31 | 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?
2,068 source possession rows across 31 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
Turnover rate
13.9% · rank 20 of 366 · 31 games
Where do turnovers occur under pressure, and who can relieve that pressure?
A closer look
Turnovers forced
16.6% · rank 199 of 366 · 31 games
Which defensive actions produce takeaways, and what shots do they concede?
A closer look
Free-throw attempt rate
34.3% · rank 202 of 366 · 31 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 8 times in the selected window; Yale won 4. 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 17, 2026 · home vs UNC Wilmington · L 67–68 · offense 103.0 / defense 104.5
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 · 31 games
| Game / venue | Result | Current opponent rank | Off. eff. | Def. eff. | Pace | eFG% | TO% | ORB% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UNC WilmingtonMar 17, 2026 · home | L 67–68 | 113 | 103.0 | 104.5 | 65.1 | 43.3 | 12.3 | 40.8 |
| PennMar 15, 2026 · neutral | L 84–88 | 203 | 116.1 | 121.7 | 64.3 | 50.0 | 12.4 | 39.5 |
| CornellMar 14, 2026 · neutral | W 88–76 | 122 | 144.9 | 125.2 | 60.7 | 62.5 | 11.5 | 51.6 |
| PrincetonMar 7, 2026 · home | W 78–53 | 184 | 117.2 | 79.6 | 66.6 | 50.8 | 10.5 | 29.4 |
| ColumbiaFeb 28, 2026 · road | W 60–54 | 217 | 98.9 | 89.0 | 60.7 | 60.0 | 23.1 | 19.0 |
| CornellFeb 27, 2026 · road | L 69–72 | 122 | 107.4 | 112.1 | 64.3 | 52.5 | 12.5 | 23.3 |
| PennFeb 21, 2026 · home | W 74–70 | 203 | 111.1 | 105.1 | 66.6 | 49.2 | 15.0 | 31.6 |
| HarvardFeb 14, 2026 · road | W 76–75 | 175 | 115.8 | 114.2 | 58.4 | 50.9 | 15.2 | 34.3 |
| DartmouthFeb 14, 2026 · road | W 83–70 | 253 | 121.5 | 102.5 | 68.3 | 61.6 | 7.3 | 17.2 |
| HowardFeb 10, 2026 · road | W 87–81 | 223 | 120.7 | 112.4 | 64.1 | 52.5 | 20.8 | 48.6 |
| BrownFeb 7, 2026 · home | W 81–69 | 249 | 124.1 | 105.7 | 65.3 | 69.6 | 16.8 | 20.0 |
| HarvardFeb 1, 2026 · home | L 65–67 | 175 | 112.3 | 115.7 | 57.9 | 50.0 | 10.4 | 27.3 |
| DartmouthJan 31, 2026 · home | W 83–68 | 253 | 129.1 | 105.8 | 64.3 | 63.8 | 14.0 | 26.9 |
| PennJan 24, 2026 · road | W 77–60 | 203 | 115.7 | 90.1 | 66.6 | 51.6 | 19.5 | 42.4 |
| ColumbiaJan 19, 2026 · home | W 91–74 | 217 | 141.2 | 114.8 | 64.5 | 60.7 | 12.4 | 43.8 |
| CornellJan 17, 2026 · home | W 102–68 | 122 | 144.0 | 96.0 | 70.8 | 70.3 | 7.1 | 25.9 |
| PrincetonJan 10, 2026 · road | L 60–76 | 184 | 92.3 | 116.9 | 65.0 | 39.2 | 12.3 | 31.7 |
| BrownJan 6, 2026 · road | W 70–53 | 249 | 100.5 | 76.1 | 69.6 | 53.7 | 21.5 | 28.1 |
| AlabamaDec 30, 2025 · road | L 78–102 | 12 | 113.1 | 147.9 | 69.0 | 46.8 | 11.6 | 35.9 |
| UAlbanyDec 10, 2025 · neutral | W 93–82 | 303 | 127.2 | 112.2 | 73.1 | 54.0 | 13.7 | 39.5 |
| UICDec 7, 2025 · home | W 80–66 | 138 | 122.7 | 101.2 | 65.2 | 50.9 | 13.8 | 38.2 |
| BrandeisDec 4, 2025 · home | W 79–61 | Unrated | 120.2 | 92.8 | 65.7 | 56.6 | 12.2 | 34.3 |
| SUNY MaritimeDec 3, 2025 · home | W 117–53 | Unrated | 144.8 | 65.6 | 80.8 | 73.9 | 13.6 | 25.9 |
| VermontNov 30, 2025 · road | W 77–74 | 194 | 124.3 | 119.5 | 62.0 | 54.5 | 4.8 | 23.3 |
| AkronNov 25, 2025 · neutral | W 97–94 | 75 | 146.7 | 142.2 | 66.1 | 71.7 | 12.1 | 38.9 |
| CharlestonNov 23, 2025 · neutral | W 74–63 | 135 | 113.9 | 97.0 | 65.0 | 54.3 | 12.3 | 28.6 |
| Green BayNov 21, 2025 · neutral | W 73–67 | 284 | 118.3 | 108.6 | 61.7 | 57.8 | 14.6 | 28.6 |
| Rhode IslandNov 19, 2025 · home | L 77–86 | 158 | 115.8 | 129.4 | 66.5 | 52.7 | 19.6 | 41.9 |
| Stony BrookNov 15, 2025 · home | W 86–79 | 280 | 134.6 | 123.7 | 63.9 | 60.4 | 15.7 | 40.0 |
| QuinnipiacNov 12, 2025 · road | W 97–60 | 192 | 135.8 | 84.0 | 71.4 | 67.2 | 18.2 | 46.2 |
| NavyNov 8, 2025 · road | W 97–68 | 182 | 128.3 | 89.9 | 75.6 | 59.1 | 13.2 | 34.3 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nick TownsendF | 30 | 33.4 | 16.3 | 7.4 | 4.3 | 61.9 | 24.3% | 30 | 1.7730 games | 9530 games |
| Isaac CeliscarF | 31 | 31.1 | 13.2 | 6.3 | 3.2 | 66.1 | 19.0% | 31 | 2.4131 games | 5931 games |
| Trevor MullinG | 31 | 27.1 | 11.5 | 2.4 | 2.7 | 57.1 | 21.4% | 31 | 2.5831 games | 15731 games |
| Casey SimmonsG | 31 | 26.6 | 10.5 | 3.9 | 1.1 | 61.4 | 18.2% | 31 | 1.7031 games | 4731 games |
| Samson AletanC | 29 | 25.8 | 7.8 | 5.8 | 1.2 | 58.7 | 15.3% | 29 | 1.3329 games | 029 games |
| Jordan BrathwaiteG | 31 | 19.0 | 6.6 | 1.8 | 1.0 | 58.4 | 17.2% | 31 | 1.7231 games | 10231 games |
| Riley FoxF | 31 | 18.0 | 10.0 | 2.1 | 0.7 | 57.0 | 26.5% | 31 | 2.0931 games | 12131 games |
| Devon ArlingtonG | 30 | 14.1 | 2.8 | 2.0 | 1.5 | 44.4 | 15.6% | 30 | 1.3930 games | 4130 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 Yale?
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.
13Source-listed players
13Same-program prior records
0Different-program records
84%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 | 8 | 2,828 | 2,828 | — | 100% | — |
| Forward | 4 | 1,695 | 1,695 | — | 100% | — |
| Center | 1 | 749 | 749 | — | 100% | — |
0 listed players have no recognized source position. The workload denominator is the matched prior-production sample (5,272 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?
13 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% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Isaac Celiscar →F | Same programYale Bulldogs | 31.1 | 13.2 | 66.1% |
| Trevor Mullin →G | Same programYale Bulldogs | 27.1 | 11.5 | 57.1% |
| Casey Simmons →G | Same programYale Bulldogs | 26.6 | 10.5 | 61.4% |
| Samson Aletan →C | Same programYale Bulldogs | 25.8 | 7.8 | 58.7% |
| Jordan Brathwaite →G | Same programYale Bulldogs | 19.0 | 6.6 | 58.4% |
| Riley Fox →F | Same programYale Bulldogs | 18.0 | 10.0 | 57.0% |
| Devon Arlington →G | Same programYale Bulldogs | 14.1 | 2.8 | 44.4% |
| Jack Sullivan →F | Same programYale Bulldogs | 6.2 | 1.9 | 47.5% |
| Courtney Wallace →G | Same programYale Bulldogs | 6.5 | 2.5 | 68.4% |
| Daniel Ogunyemi →F | Same programYale Bulldogs | 4.9 | 2.6 | 67.1% |
| Jeannot Basima →G | Same programYale Bulldogs | 4.1 | 1.2 | 50.2% |
| Alvin Loving →G | Same programYale Bulldogs | 3.9 | 1.6 | 54.1% |
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…
Yale vs Baylor
72.2Yale
80.0Baylor
Baylor win estimate73.4%
Model signalLean
Projected home margin7.8
Projected total152.2
80% home-margin range-8.1 to 23.7
Estimated possessions66.0
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityHome 1.6 pts
Baylor attack 54.7% · Yale defense 49.8%Yale attack 54.1% · Baylor defense 50.9%
Ball securityAway 1.7 pts
Baylor attack 15.7% · Yale defense 16.3%Yale attack 15.3% · Baylor defense 17.6%
Second chancesHome 4.6 pts
Baylor attack 36.1% · Yale defense 27.6%Yale attack 31.8% · Baylor defense 27.9%
Free-throw pressureHome 2.5 pts
Baylor attack 35.5% · Yale defense 30.7%Yale attack 34.8% · Baylor defense 32.3%
Foster Pavilion
Preseason baseline · roster changes are not model features.
No verified pregame market line imported. Check the forecast record →
Brown vs Yale
63.1Brown
78.0Yale
Yale win estimate85.7%
Model signalStrong lean
Projected home margin14.9
Projected total141.1
80% home-margin range-1.0 to 30.8
Estimated possessions66.1
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityHome 3.2 pts
Yale attack 54.1% · Brown defense 50.6%Brown attack 50.1% · Yale defense 49.8%
Ball securityHome 4.9 pts
Yale attack 15.3% · Brown defense 17.3%Brown attack 19.1% · Yale defense 16.3%
Second chancesAway 0.2 pts
Yale attack 31.8% · Brown defense 29.9%Brown attack 29.6% · Yale defense 27.6%
Free-throw pressureAway 2.0 pts
Yale attack 34.8% · Brown defense 35.0%Brown attack 32.4% · Yale defense 30.7%
John J. Lee Amphitheater
Preseason baseline · roster changes are not model features.
No verified pregame market line imported. Check the forecast record →
Penn vs Yale
68.3Penn
81.1Yale
Yale win estimate82.6%
Model signalStrong lean
Projected home margin12.8
Projected total149.4
80% home-margin range-3.2 to 28.7
Estimated possessions67.1
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityHome 1.0 pts
Yale attack 54.1% · Penn defense 51.8%Penn attack 51.1% · Yale defense 49.8%
Ball securityHome 0.8 pts
Yale attack 15.3% · Penn defense 15.6%Penn attack 16.8% · Yale defense 16.3%
Second chancesAway 0.2 pts
Yale attack 31.8% · Penn defense 30.1%Penn attack 29.5% · Yale defense 27.6%
Free-throw pressureHome 1.7 pts
Yale attack 34.8% · Penn defense 29.8%Penn attack 33.9% · Yale defense 30.7%
John J. Lee Amphitheater
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 →