Auburn

SEC · 2025–26 · Raw net rank 84 · Raw net 6.1 · Tempo 69.0 · 38 Division I games · Through 2026-04-05

Record: 22–16; 22 wins
AdjNet: 14.6β; rank 39 of 365
AdjO: 121.2β; rank 12 of 365
AdjD: 106.6β; rank 132 of 365
AdjT: 68.4β
SOS: 10.6β; rank 11 of 363
NCSOS: 6.9β
WAB: 1.1β; rank 42 of 363
RR: 0.7β
Exp. W: 21.3β

Scouting Report

Scouting report with national ranks
Category	Offense	Defense	D-I Average
Efficiency
Efficiency / 100 poss.	119.122	113.0289	108.5
Four Factors
Effective FG%	53.0104	53.7290	51.4
TO / 100 poss.	14.645	16.3199	16.7
Offensive rebound %	37.015	30.9197	30.6
FTA / FGA %	43.219	34.3159	35.0
Shooting
3P%	34.4145	36.7335	33.9
2P%	53.988	52.8227	51.7
FT%	74.4110	74.5299	72.5
Style
3PA / FGA %	40.2	40.1	39.5
Assists / FGM %	47.6	52.0	52.6
Blocks / opp. 2PA %	11.6	12.4	9.5
Point Distribution
3-pointers %	30.1	33.2	31.4
2-pointers %	46.7	47.6	48.8
Free throws %	23.3	19.2	19.8

Best · Median · Worst · Mark: further right is a better national rank, of 365 teams.

Rotation Depth

Effective Rotation Size: 7.7
Top Three Share of Minutes: 47%
Bench Share of Minutes: 26%
Players with Logged Minutes: 15

Bench: players outside the top five in minutes. Definitions

Schedule and Results

Schedule and results
Date	Opponent	Result	Poss.	Site	Record
11-03	Bethune-Cookman	W 95–90 1OT	79.7	Home	1–0
11-06	Merrimack	W 95–57	67.5	Home	2–0
11-11	Wofford	W 93–62	71.2	Home	3–0
11-16	Houston	L 72–73	66.7	Neutral	3–1
11-19	Jackson St.	W 112–66	75.5	Home	4–1
11-24	Oregon	W 84–73	69.9	Neutral	5–1
11-25	Michigan	L 72–102	71.1	Neutral	5–2
11-26	St. John's (NY)	W 85–74	66.6	Neutral	6–2
12-03	NC State	W 83–73	70.3	Home	7–2
12-06	Arizona	L 68–97	74.3	Away	7–3
12-13	Chattanooga	W 92–78	70.0	Neutral	8–3
12-20	Purdue	L 60–88	65.2	Neutral	8–4
12-29	Queens (NC)	W 106–65	74.0	Home	9–4
01-03	Georgia	L 100–104 1OT	82.4	Away	9–5
01-06	Texas A&M	L 88–90	73.1	Home	9–6
01-10	Arkansas	W 95–73	71.7	Home	10–6
01-14	Missouri	L 74–84	68.5	Away	10–7
01-17	South Carolina	W 71–67	69.9	Home	11–7
01-20	Ole Miss	W 78–66	65.8	Away	12–7
01-24	Florida	W 76–67	65.4	Away	13–7
01-28	Texas	W 88–82	63.7	Home	14–7
01-31	Tennessee	L 69–77	68.6	Away	14–8
02-07	Alabama	L 92–96	74.7	Home	14–9
02-10	Vanderbilt	L 76–84	64.0	Home	14–10
02-14	Arkansas	L 75–88	66.8	Away	14–11
02-18	Mississippi St.	L 85–91	67.4	Away	14–12
02-21	Kentucky	W 75–74	70.7	Home	15–12
02-24	Oklahoma	L 79–91	66.3	Away	15–13
02-28	Ole Miss	L 79–85	67.0	Home	15–14
03-03	LSU	W 88–74	67.4	Home	16–14
03-07	Alabama	L 84–96	71.2	Away	16–15
03-11	Mississippi St.	W 79–61	71.3	Neutral	17–15
03-12	Tennessee	L 62–72	63.9	Neutral	17–16
03-17	South Alabama	W 78–67	64.2	—	18–16
03-22	Seattle U	W 91–85	72.7	—	19–16
03-25	Nevada	W 75–69	64.4	—	20–16
04-02	Illinois St.	W 88–66	64.3	—	21–16
04-05	Tulsa	W 92–86 1OT	81.8	—	22–16

Roster · 15 players

Player logs in 38 of 38 team games

Team roster, per game
Column groups	Minutes			Per Game							Shooting									Last Five Team Games
Player	G	MPG	Team Min%	Pts	Reb	Ast	Stl	Blk	TO	PF	2P	2P%	3P	3P%	FT	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/FGA	G	MPG	Min%	Pts/G
Tahaad Pettiford	38	32:14	79.8%	15.4	3.0	3.8	1.1	0.6	2.2	2.4	124–249	49.8%	73–252	29.0%	118–143	82.5%	46.6%	51.9%	28.5%	5	32:53 +0:39	80.2%	14.4 −1.0
Keyshawn Hall	36	33:40	79.0%	19.3	7.1	2.6	0.7	0.6	2.5	2.4	137–277	49.5%	64–169	37.9%	228–266	85.7%	52.2%	61.6%	59.6%	5	34:32 +0:52	84.2%	15.8 −3.5
Kevin Overton	38	31:31	78.0%	14.1	3.3	1.3	1.1	0.2	1.0	2.4	73–147	49.7%	95–230	41.3%	104–121	86.0%	57.2%	62.2%	32.1%	5	34:14 +2:43	83.5%	18.6 +4.5
Sebastian Williams-Adams	38	27:17	67.5%	7.0	3.5	1.5	1.2	0.8	1.1	2.5	82–147	55.8%	12–39	30.8%†	67–129	51.9%	53.8%	55.0%	69.4%	5	24:44 −2:33	60.3%	8.8 +1.8
Elyjah Freeman	38	26:41	66.1%	9.2	5.2	1.2	1.3	0.6	1.1	1.7	83–164	50.6%	35–102	34.3%	79–113	69.9%	50.9%	55.4%	42.5%	5	34:39 +7:57	84.5%	10.0 +0.8
KeShawn Murphy	31	23:52	48.2%	10.7	6.8	1.3	1.0	1.0	0.9	2.0	113–184	61.4%	13–41	31.7%†	66–90	73.3%	58.9%	62.5%	40.0%	—	—	—	—
Filip Jovic	37	18:11	43.8%	6.3	4.0	0.6	0.6	0.3	0.7	2.4	89–136	65.4%	0–3	0.0%†	54–99	54.5%	64.0%	63.5%	71.2%	5	24:36 +6:25	60.0%	11.4 +5.1
Kaden Magwood	20	11:06	14.5%	3.5	0.9	1.8	0.5	0.1	0.7	1.1	17–34	50.0%†	10–36	27.8%†	7–8	87.5%†	45.7%†	48.3%†	11.4%†	5	12:42 +1:36	31.0%	4.4 +0.9
Blake Muschalek	27	5:25	9.5%	0.6	0.6	0.2	0.4	0.0	0.1	1.0	2–7	28.6%†	2–14	14.3%†	6–10	60.0%†	23.8%†	31.5%†	47.6%†	3	8:12 +2:47	12.0%	0.7 +0.1
Simon WalkerUnder 100 minutes	13	5:00	4.2%	2.5	0.5	0.2	0.1	0.0	0.2	0.6	3–4	75.0%†	9–17	52.9%†	0–0	—	78.6%†	78.6%†	0.0%†	2	3:10 −1:51	3.1%	1.5 −1.0
Emeka OpurumFew gamesUnder 100 minutes	6	9:33	3.7%	3.8	2.5	0.2	0.3	1.0	0.0	1.3	10–13	76.9%†	0–0	—	3–6	50.0%†	76.9%†	73.5%†	46.2%†	—	—	—	—
Abdullahi BashirFew gamesUnder 100 minutes	6	9:01	3.5%	2.0	0.5	0.5	0.2	0.0	0.5	0.5	2–2	100.0%†	2–13	15.4%†	2–2	100.0%†	33.3%†	37.8%†	13.3%†	—	—	—	—
Reed TrappFew gamesUnder 100 minutes	6	0:50	0.3%	0.3	0.2	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	1–2	50.0%†	0–0	—	0–0	—	50.0%†	50.0%†	0.0%†	1	0:39 −0:11	0.3%	2.0 +1.7
CJ WilliamsFew gamesUnder 100 minutes	5	0:48	0.3%	0.6	0.2	0.6	0.0	0.0	0.2	0.0	0–0	—	1–2	50.0%†	0–0	—	75.0%†	75.0%†	0.0%†	1	0:39 −0:09	0.3%	0.0 −0.6
Drake CardwellFew gamesUnder 100 minutes	3	0:58	0.2%	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0–0	—	0–0	—	0–0	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Team, games with logs · per game	38 games			83.0	36.3	13.2	not published	4.1	10.2	not published	736–1366	53.9%	316–918	34.4%	734–987	74.4%	53.0%	58.0%	43.2%
Sum of players				83.0	32.7	13.2	7.5	4.1	9.9	17.0	Shooting residuals: see Player Lines Against Team Totals.
Residual: team minus players				0.0	+3.6	0.0	not published	+0.0	+0.2	not published

G: logged games. Team Min%: share of team minutes on court (40 per game plus overtime). 2P, 3P and FT show made–attempted. † Few attempts: under 100 FGA, 50 3PA or 25 FTA. Few G: under 10 games. <100 min: under 100 minutes. Last Five Team Games columns show change from the season value and hide on narrow screens.

Speculative Compensation · 2025–26β

Estimated share of the school's revenue-sharing budget for men's basketball. Not observed pay.

Team Pool: $3.55M; 80% Range $2.55M to $4.95M
Tier: Power 4; medium evidence
Team Pool, Scenarios Z1 to Z4: $3.55M in all four; Scenario medians
Players with Figures: 15; 6 floor only

Players in possession-share order
Player	Poss. Share	Speculative Best Guess	80% Range	Median % of Team Pool	Scenarios Z1 to Z4	Floor Part	Evidence and Flags
Tahaad Pettiford	80.7%	$730K	$480K to $1.20M	19.8%	$730K in all four	$23K	Sufficient evidence
Keyshawn Hall	79.9%	$545K	$300K to $855K	15.3%	$545K in all four	$23K	Sufficient evidence
Kevin Overton	78.9%	$610K	$375K to $985K	16.9%	$610K in all four	$23K	Sufficient evidence
Sebastian Williams-Adams	67.8%	$300K	$61K to $530K	9.0%	$300K in all four	$23K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Elyjah Freeman	66.2%	$460K	$240K to $745K	13.1%	$460K in all four	$23K	Sufficient evidence
KeShawn Murphy	49.7%	$360K	$205K to $575K	10.2%	$360K in all four	$23K	Sufficient evidence
Filip Jovic	43.4%	$215K	$62K to $370K	6.4%	$215K in all four	$23K	Sufficient evidence
Kaden Magwood	13.5%	$63K	$24K to $110K	1.9%	$63K in all four	$23K	Sufficient evidence
Blake Muschalek	9.4%	$43K	$18K to $80K	1.2%	$43K in all four	$23K	Limited evidence
Simon Walker	3.9%	$23K	$13K to $38K	0.7%	$23K in all four	$23K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimate
Emeka Opurum	3.1%	$23K	$13K to $38K	0.7%	$23K in all four	$23K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimate
Abdullahi Bashir	2.8%	$23K	$13K to $38K	0.7%	$23K in all four	$23K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimate
CJ Williams	0.3%	$23K	$13K to $38K	0.7%	$23K in all four	$23K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimate
Reed Trapp	0.3%	$23K	$13K to $38K	0.7%	$23K in all four	$23K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimate
Drake Cardwell	0.2%	$23K	$13K to $38K	0.7%	$23K in all four	$23K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimate
Team Pool	—	$3.55M	$2.55M to $4.95M	100%	$3.55M in all four	—

What-If Calculator · Speculativeβ

Re-runs the 4,000 joint draws with your inputs. The address saves your inputs.

School Finances · School-Reported (EADA)

Self-reported to the U.S. Department of Education. Expenses cover coaching, travel, aid and operations, not player pay.

School-reported finances, 2024-25, Auburn University (NCAA Division I-FBS)
Measure	School-Reported Amount	Note
Men's basketball revenue	$26,568,984
Men's basketball expenses	$20,535,097
Athletics department expenses	$195,930,163
Athletics department revenue	$205,275,913

Team Totalsβ

Season per game, 38 games, 2,649 possessions. Observed box-score sums, unadjusted. Definitions

Team and opponent season totals
Statistic	Team	Opponents
Points	83.0	78.8
Field goals made	27.7	27.4
Field goals attempted	60.1	59.2
3-pointers made	8.3	8.7
3-pointers attempted	24.2	23.8
Free throws made	19.3	15.2
Free throws attempted	26.0	20.3
Offensive rebounds	13.1	10.4
Defensive rebounds	23.3	22.2
Total rebounds	36.3	32.6
Assists	13.2	14.3
Blocks	4.1	4.5
Turnovers	10.2	11.4
Steals	No team figure. Players sum to 284.
Personal fouls	No team figure. Players sum to 646.
Minutes (derived)	202.0	not published

38 of 38 games have player logs. Residual is team total minus sum of players. Team rebounds and team turnovers have no player owner, so a residual is expected. Definitions

Player lines against team totals
Statistic	Status	Team Total, Logged Games	Sum of Players	Residual	Tolerance	Team Total, Games Without Logs
Points	Reconciled	3,154	3,154	0	±15.8	0
Field goals made	Reconciled	1,052	1,052	0	±5.3	0
Field goals attempted	Reconciled	2,284	2,284	0	±11.4	0
3-pointers made	Reconciled	316	316	0	±2.0	0
3-pointers attempted	Reconciled	918	918	0	±4.6	0
Free throws made	Reconciled	734	734	0	±3.7	0
Free throws attempted	Reconciled	987	987	0	±4.9	0
Offensive rebounds	No player split	not published	not published	not published	not published	not published
Defensive rebounds	No player split	not published	not published	not published	not published	not published
Total rebounds	Residual shown	1,381	1,244	+137	±110.5	0
Assists	Reconciled	501	501	0	±2.5	0
Blocks	Reconciled	157	156	+1	±2.0	0
Turnovers	Reconciled	386	377	+9	±11.6	0
Steals	No team figure	not published	284	not published	not published	not published
Personal fouls	No team figure	not published	646	not published	not published	not published
Minutes (derived)	Reconciled	7,675	7,654	+20.8	±153.5	0

Model-Implied Player Valueβ

Ranges are the 10th to 90th percentile of whole-game resampling draws. They are not calibrated intervals.

Open circle: limited evidence. Filled circle: sufficient evidence. Line: zero. No graphic: insufficient evidence.

Net points per 100 possessions, in possession-share order.
Player	Poss. Share	Net and Rangeβ
Tahaad Pettiford	80.7%	+3.6range +2.4 to +4.6Sufficient evidence
Keyshawn Hall	79.9%	+2.4range +1.1 to +3.6Sufficient evidence
Kevin Overton	78.9%	+2.9range +1.7 to +4.2Sufficient evidence
Sebastian Williams-Adams	67.8%	+0.8range -0.6 to +2.1Sufficient evidence
Elyjah Freeman	66.2%	+2.3range +0.8 to +3.7Sufficient evidence
KeShawn Murphy	49.7%	+2.4range +1.1 to +3.7Sufficient evidence
Filip Jovic	43.4%	+1.1range -0.1 to +2.3Sufficient evidence
Kaden Magwood	13.5%	+0.1range -0.8 to +1.0Sufficient evidence
Blake Muschalek	9.4%	-0.9range -1.8 to +0.2Limited evidence
Simon Walker	3.9%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence
Emeka Opurum	3.1%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence
Abdullahi Bashir	2.8%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence
CJ Williams	0.3%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence
Reed Trapp	0.3%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence
Drake Cardwell	0.2%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence

Team Aggregate of Player Values, 2026β

Summary of the player values below. Split role: descriptive: not used in fit or gates. Model nil-value-v3. Definitions · NIL Methodology

Average value over five on-court slots, net points per 100 possessions: +11.5range +10.5 to +12.3Sufficient evidence

200 joint draws. The range is the 10th to 90th percentile. Player ranges cannot be added.

9 valued players hold 97.9% of on-court time. 6 without a value (under 300 possessions) hold 2.1%, counted at replacement level -9.5. Limited-evidence players hold 1.9%.

NIL Methodology · Scheduling and Model-Implied Value