A relative strength
Turnovers forced
19.7% · rank 43 of 366 · 31 games
Which defensive actions produce takeaways, and what shots do they concede?
← Program librarySource edition Sep 12, 2026
The program dossier / men’s basketball
IU Indy
2025–26 performance, personnel and game context.
A starting point for 2026–27 preparation.
Independent preseason modelNo.339
-14.9 adjusted net
per 100 estimated possessions
7–252025–26 recorded finals
103.5Adjusted offense · 2026–27 baseline
118.4Adjusted defense · lower is better
70.8Model tempo · possessions / 40 min
Publisher lens / exact source team ID
A second read on IU Indy.
Checking the attributed publisher rating…
01 / Both ends of the floor
The possession profile.
7–2532 recorded games · 31 paired efficiency samples · pace 75.3Mean opponent adj. net -3.3 · 30 rated opponents
Offense
Effective FG%
52.9%32 games · higher is betterRank 123 / 366 · 67th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent effective FG%
57.7%32 games · lower is betterRank 363 / 366 · 1th favorable percentileOffense
Turnover rate
15.6%31 games · lower is betterRank 111 / 366 · 70th favorable percentileDefense
Turnovers forced
19.7%31 games · higher is betterRank 43 / 366 · 88th favorable percentileOffense
Offensive rebound rate
29.4%32 games · higher is betterRank 241 / 366 · 34th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent offensive rebound rate
34.7%32 games · lower is betterRank 342 / 366 · 7th favorable percentileOffense
Free-throw attempt rate
21.1%32 games · higher is betterRank 366 / 366 · 0th favorable percentileDefense
Opponent free-throw attempt rate
46.4%32 games · lower is betterRank 360 / 366 · 2th favorable percentileShooting and ball-movement detail
| Metric | Observed rate | Games | Definition |
|---|---|---|---|
| Offensive efficiency | 108.8 | 31 | Points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Defensive efficiency | 117.2 | 31 | Opponent points per 100 estimated possessions. |
| Two-point FG% | 56.0% | 32 | (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Opponent two-point FG% | 57.6% | 32 | Opponent (FGM − 3PM) / (FGA − 3PA). |
| Three-point FG% | 32.6% | 32 | 3PM / 3PA. |
| Opponent three-point FG% | 38.6% | 32 | Opponent 3PM / 3PA. |
| Three-point attempt share | 42.9% | 32 | 3PA / FGA; a style measure, not a quality grade. |
| Opponent three-point attempt share | 35.3% | 32 | Opponent 3PA / FGA; a style measure. |
| Free-throw accuracy | 72.7% | 32 | FTM / FTA. |
| Opponent free-throw accuracy | 74.0% | 32 | Opponent FTM / FTA; not attributed to defensive skill. |
| Assisted field-goal share | 64.0% | 32 | Assists / FGM; describes recorded ball movement. |
| Opponent assisted FG share | 52.7% | 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?
2,451 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
Turnover rate
15.6% · rank 111 of 366 · 31 games
Where do turnovers occur under pressure, and who can relieve that pressure?
A closer look
Opponent effective FG%
57.7% · rank 363 of 366 · 32 games
What coverages and lineups account for the shot quality opponents receive?
A closer look
Free-throw attempt rate
21.1% · rank 366 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 8 times in the selected window; IU Indy won 2. 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 3, 2026 · road vs Cleveland St · L 93–101 · offense 112.1 / defense 121.7
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% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cleveland StMar 3, 2026 · road | L 93–101 | 267 | 112.1 | 121.7 | 83.0 | 54.1 | 14.5 | 23.8 |
| Purdue FWFeb 28, 2026 · home | L 81–87 | 210 | 116.4 | 125.0 | 69.6 | 58.7 | 20.1 | 34.4 |
| OaklandFeb 25, 2026 · home | L 74–86 | 167 | 101.9 | 118.5 | 72.6 | 57.4 | 19.3 | 25.0 |
| Wright StFeb 20, 2026 · road | L 73–85 | 154 | 102.5 | 119.3 | 71.2 | 52.5 | 12.6 | 16.7 |
| Purdue FWFeb 15, 2026 · road | L 78–83 | 210 | 104.1 | 110.7 | 75.0 | 49.3 | 17.3 | 33.3 |
| N KentuckyFeb 12, 2026 · home | L 81–84 | 183 | 114.6 | 118.8 | 70.7 | 50.7 | 15.6 | 41.7 |
| MilwaukeeFeb 10, 2026 · home | L 88–92 | 218 | 113.6 | 118.7 | 77.5 | 50.7 | 9.0 | 23.8 |
| Cleveland StFeb 7, 2026 · home | W 82–74 | 267 | 109.3 | 98.7 | 75.0 | 57.4 | 17.3 | 24.2 |
| Youngstown StJan 30, 2026 · road | L 76–85 | 176 | 103.7 | 116.0 | 73.3 | 52.3 | 19.1 | 25.7 |
| Robert MorrisJan 29, 2026 · road | L 58–74 | 166 | 97.3 | 124.2 | 59.6 | 49.1 | 16.8 | 22.9 |
| OaklandJan 22, 2026 · road | W 103–85 | 167 | 144.4 | 119.2 | 71.3 | 67.3 | 14.0 | 48.4 |
| Detroit MercyJan 17, 2026 · home | L 77–80 | 294 | 102.7 | 106.7 | 75.0 | 50.7 | 17.3 | 34.2 |
| Robert MorrisJan 15, 2026 · home | W 96–93 | 166 | 121.9 | 118.1 | 70.0 | 54.7 | 10.2 | 33.3 |
| MilwaukeeJan 11, 2026 · road | L 83–95 | 218 | 119.8 | 137.2 | 69.3 | 54.7 | 13.0 | 28.1 |
| Green BayJan 10, 2026 · road | L 59–75 | 284 | 81.9 | 104.1 | 72.1 | 37.7 | 12.5 | 20.8 |
| Wright StJan 4, 2026 · home | L 77–81 | 154 | 114.8 | 120.8 | 67.1 | 54.7 | 16.4 | 35.3 |
| N KentuckyJan 1, 2026 · road | L 72–81 | 183 | 102.3 | 115.1 | 70.4 | 51.6 | 21.3 | 33.3 |
| Cleveland StDec 30, 2025 · road | L 86–99 | 267 | 113.1 | 130.2 | 76.0 | 51.4 | 13.2 | 33.3 |
| Grand CanyonDec 23, 2025 · road | L 78–91 | 65 | 103.7 | 121.0 | 75.2 | 53.9 | 20.0 | 30.3 |
| Miami Mid'townDec 16, 2025 · home | W 126–73 | Unrated | 144.3 | 83.6 | 87.3 | 63.7 | 8.0 | 37.2 |
| Green BayDec 11, 2025 · home | L 75–85 | 284 | 102.7 | 116.4 | 73.0 | 45.1 | 12.3 | 22.5 |
| Youngstown StDec 6, 2025 · home | L 55–78 | 176 | 82.4 | 116.8 | 66.8 | 36.2 | 18.0 | 29.5 |
| Detroit MercyDec 4, 2025 · road | L 78–92 | 294 | 109.8 | 129.5 | 71.1 | 50.0 | 14.1 | 34.1 |
| Morehead StNov 29, 2025 · home | W 85–80 | 276 | 104.0 | 97.9 | 81.7 | 55.7 | 15.9 | 17.9 |
| Air ForceNov 23, 2025 · road | L 85–98 | 347 | 107.9 | 124.3 | 78.8 | 51.4 | 16.5 | 30.2 |
| Alabama StNov 21, 2025 · neutral | L 80–101 | 322 | 99.9 | 126.1 | 80.1 | 56.7 | 22.5 | 22.5 |
| Charleston SoNov 19, 2025 · road | L 91–103 | 278 | 110.5 | 125.0 | 82.4 | 49.4 | 4.9 | 24.5 |
| E MichiganNov 14, 2025 · road | W 90–83 | 274 | 114.5 | 105.6 | 78.6 | 62.5 | 22.9 | 29.0 |
| IU ColumbusNov 11, 2025 · home | W 121–77 | Unrated | — | — | — | 58.7 | — | 40.9 |
| ButlerNov 8, 2025 · road | L 80–112 | 82 | 88.6 | 124.1 | 90.3 | 43.1 | 18.8 | 28.0 |
| Long IslandNov 6, 2025 · home | L 90–94 | 269 | 104.0 | 108.7 | 86.5 | 48.7 | 16.2 | 31.1 |
| Ohio StateNov 3, 2025 · road | L 102–118 | 25 | 118.8 | 137.5 | 85.8 | 57.9 | 15.1 | 28.6 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Finley WoodwardF | 32 | 30.8 | 8.8 | 5.3 | 6.3 | 53.4 | 15.8% | 32 | 2.8732 games | 132 games |
| Kyler D'AugustinoG | 30 | 32.3 | 18.5 | 3.2 | 3.4 | 60.3 | 24.4% | 30 | 1.8230 games | 10430 games |
| Maguire MitchellG | 32 | 26.3 | 11.8 | 2.3 | 1.2 | 56.0 | 20.0% | 32 | 1.3232 games | 23832 games |
| Micah DavisG | 32 | 25.4 | 9.4 | 2.1 | 2.9 | 51.2 | 20.0% | 32 | 1.6432 games | 16632 games |
| Jaxon EdwardsG | 30 | 23.0 | 11.6 | 5.6 | 1.9 | 57.6 | 23.8% | 30 | 1.0430 games | 4730 games |
| Kameron TinsleyF | 29 | 17.5 | 7.9 | 2.4 | 1.1 | 56.8 | 20.2% | 29 | 1.2829 games | 13629 games |
| Aiden MillerF | 29 | 14.7 | 5.0 | 3.8 | 1.0 | 51.2 | 17.9% | 29 | 1.2729 games | 9829 games |
| Matt CompasG | 31 | 13.5 | 7.1 | 1.2 | 1.4 | 53.6 | 24.7% | 31 | 1.5631 games | 3431 games |
| Reece HagyF | 31 | 11.0 | 2.4 | 2.1 | 0.7 | 48.7 | 11.2% | 31 | 2.8831 games | 3331 games |
| JP DragasG | 15 | 16.3 | 6.1 | 1.6 | 1.6 | 53.8 | 17.5% | 15 | 1.6015 games | 6615 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 IU Indy?
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.
15Source-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 | 9 | 4,050 | 4,050 | — | 100% | — |
| Forward | 6 | 2,375 | 2,375 | — | 100% | — |
| Center | 0 | — | — | — | — | — |
0 listed players have no recognized source position. The workload denominator is the matched prior-production sample (6,425 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?
15 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% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Finley Woodward →F | Same programIU Indianapolis Jaguars | 30.8 | 8.8 | 53.4% |
| Kyler D'Augustino →G | Same programIU Indianapolis Jaguars | 32.3 | 18.5 | 60.3% |
| Maguire Mitchell →G | Same programIU Indianapolis Jaguars | 26.3 | 11.8 | 56.0% |
| Micah Davis →G | Same programIU Indianapolis Jaguars | 25.4 | 9.4 | 51.2% |
| Jaxon Edwards →G | Same programIU Indianapolis Jaguars | 23.0 | 11.6 | 57.6% |
| Kameron Tinsley →F | Same programIU Indianapolis Jaguars | 17.5 | 7.9 | 56.8% |
| Aiden Miller →F | Same programIU Indianapolis Jaguars | 14.7 | 5.0 | 51.2% |
| Matt Compas →G | Same programIU Indianapolis Jaguars | 13.5 | 7.1 | 53.6% |
| Reece Hagy →F | Same programIU Indianapolis Jaguars | 11.0 | 2.4 | 48.7% |
| JP Dragas →G | Same programIU Indianapolis Jaguars | 16.3 | 6.1 | 53.8% |
| Gabe Stewart →F | Same programIU Indianapolis Jaguars | 5.6 | 1.1 | 32.8% |
| Lav Cvetkovic →F | Same programIU Indianapolis Jaguars | 3.9 | 1.4 | 55.3% |
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…
IU Indy vs Kansas St
70.0IU Indy
91.2Kansas St
Kansas St win estimate92.3%
Model signalStrong lean
Projected home margin21.2
Projected total161.2
80% home-margin range5.3 to 37.1
Estimated possessions73.3
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityAway 4.6 pts
Kansas St attack 53.1% · IU Indy defense 56.9%IU Indy attack 49.9% · Kansas St defense 49.1%
Ball securityAway 0.6 pts
Kansas St attack 17.7% · IU Indy defense 17.9%IU Indy attack 17.2% · Kansas St defense 17.9%
Second chancesAway 1.2 pts
Kansas St attack 30.8% · IU Indy defense 33.8%IU Indy attack 28.6% · Kansas St defense 30.4%
Free-throw pressureAway 3.4 pts
Kansas St attack 32.3% · IU Indy defense 40.2%IU Indy attack 29.0% · Kansas St defense 33.5%
Bramlage Coliseum
Preseason baseline · roster changes are not model features.
No verified pregame market line imported. Check the forecast record →
Charleston So vs IU Indy
80.9Charleston So
79.7IU Indy
IU Indy win estimate50.6%
Model signalToss-up
Projected home margin-1.3
Projected total160.6
80% home-margin range-17.2 to 14.6
Estimated possessions72.7
Why the model tiltsfour-factor edge
Shot qualityHome 5.8 pts
IU Indy attack 49.9% · Charleston So defense 50.5%Charleston So attack 50.5% · IU Indy defense 56.9%
Ball securityAway 2.8 pts
IU Indy attack 17.2% · Charleston So defense 13.9%Charleston So attack 18.4% · IU Indy defense 17.9%
Second chancesHome 4.0 pts
IU Indy attack 28.6% · Charleston So defense 29.1%Charleston So attack 29.3% · IU Indy defense 33.8%
Free-throw pressureAway 1.3 pts
IU Indy attack 29.0% · Charleston So defense 36.2%Charleston So attack 34.3% · IU Indy defense 40.2%
The Jungle
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 →