Princeton

Ivy · 2025–26 · Raw net rank 280 · Raw net -7.6 · Tempo 64.5 · 28 Division I games · Through 2026-03-07

Record: 8–20; 8 wins
AdjNet: -5.7β; rank 251 of 365
AdjO: 104.6β; rank 259 of 365
AdjD: 110.3β; rank 232 of 365
AdjT: 65.4β
SOS: 0.6β; rank 137 of 363
NCSOS: 0.8β
WAB: -13.3β; rank 287 of 363
RR: -1.8β
Exp. W: 9.8β

Scouting Report

Scouting report with national ranks
Category	Offense	Defense	D-I Average
Efficiency
Efficiency / 100 poss.	103.7274	111.4259	108.5
Four Factors
Effective FG%	49.6260	52.0210	51.4
TO / 100 poss.	17.1212	14.3328	16.7
Offensive rebound %	27.2286	28.582	30.6
FTA / FGA %	34.6191	34.0152	35.0
Shooting
3P%	33.9178	31.136	33.9
2P%	48.6297	55.7323	51.7
FT%	74.890	72.6189	72.5
Style
3PA / FGA %	44.5	41.4	39.5
Assists / FGM %	55.0	50.1	52.6
Blocks / opp. 2PA %	6.5	10.6	9.5
Point Distribution
3-pointers %	36.2	30.0	31.4
2-pointers %	43.1	50.8	48.8
Free throws %	20.7	19.2	19.8

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

Rotation Depth

Effective Rotation Size: 8.6
Top Three Share of Minutes: 45%
Bench Share of Minutes: 32%
Players with Logged Minutes: 17

Bench: players outside the top five in minutes. Definitions

Schedule and Results

Schedule and results
Date	Opponent	Result	Poss.	Site	Record
11-08	Akron	L 69–104	77.2	Away	0–1
11-11	Bucknell	W 73–63	68.4	Home	1–1
11-15	Kansas	L 57–76	70.9	Away	1–2
11-18	Iona	L 69–89	77.4	Away	1–3
11-20	Northeastern	W 70–57	67.1	Home	2–3
11-24	Bradley	L 64–88	69.7	Neutral	2–4
11-25	Temple	L 75–79	67.0	Neutral	2–5
11-26	Vermont	L 74–79	63.9	Neutral	2–6
11-30	Saint Joseph's	L 58–60	62.3	Neutral	2–7
12-03	Monmouth	L 58–63	67.2	Away	2–8
12-06	Loyola Chicago	L 68–73	64.0	Away	2–9
12-10	Merrimack	L 56–59	57.7	Home	2–10
12-22	Temple	L 61–65	59.9	Away	2–11
12-30	Vermont	W 75–69 1OT	67.3	Home	3–11
01-05	Penn	W 78–76	66.5	Home	4–11
01-10	Yale	W 76–60	65.0	Home	5–11
01-17	Harvard	L 80–87 1OT	67.7	Away	5–12
01-19	Dartmouth	L 69–71	61.2	Away	5–13
01-24	Brown	W 63–53	63.8	Home	6–13
01-30	Cornell	L 64–87	61.5	Away	6–14
01-31	Columbia	W 80–68	62.0	Away	7–14
02-07	Penn	L 60–61	58.4	Away	7–15
02-13	Cornell	L 65–89	63.3	Home	7–16
02-14	Columbia	L 65–75	56.3	Home	7–17
02-20	Brown	L 71–80	64.1	Away	7–18
02-27	Harvard	L 56–58	60.0	Home	7–19
02-28	Dartmouth	W 82–61	64.6	Home	8–19
03-07	Yale	L 53–78	66.6	Away	8–20

Roster · 17 players

Player logs in 28 of 28 team games

Team roster, season totals
Column groups	Minutes			Season Totals							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
Jackson Hicke	28	34:29	85.4%	441	146	67	26	9	54	73	105–205	51.2%	48–122	39.3%	87–105	82.9%	54.1%	59.1%	32.1%	5	33:07 −1:22	82.8%	18.2 +2.4
Landon Clark	28	29:09	72.2%	174	112	52	25	9	33	62	22–44	50.0%	37–102	36.3%	19–26	73.1%	53.1%	55.3%	17.8%	5	31:49 +2:40	79.5%	8.4 +2.2
Malik Abdullahi	26	28:46	66.2%	247	146	31	11	7	40	64	84–136	61.8%	2–21	9.5%†	73–102	71.6%	55.4%	61.2%	65.0%	5	31:31 +2:46	78.8%	9.8 +0.3
Jack Stanton	22	31:48	61.9%	244	79	38	20	3	21	43	17–36	47.2%	55–147	37.4%	45–48	93.8%	54.4%	59.8%	26.2%	—	—	—	—
Jacob Huggins	28	21:23	53.0%	132	122	47	9	17	19	50	33–86	38.4%	6–19	31.6%†	48–80	60.0%	40.0%	47.1%	76.2%	5	27:53 +6:31	69.7%	3.8 −0.9
Dalen Davis	19	28:57	48.7%	281	45	41	10	1	42	38	60–155	38.7%	29–78	37.2%	74–83	89.2%	44.4%	52.1%	35.6%	5	32:47 +3:50	81.9%	15.0 +0.2
CJ Happy	24	18:39	39.6%	153	60	39	10	7	32	57	36–77	46.8%	24–77	31.2%	9–24	37.5%†	46.8%	46.5%	15.6%	2	16:03 −2:36	16.0%	3.5 −2.9
Sebastian Whitfield	28	12:12	30.2%	89	53	13	10	2	22	27	23–53	43.4%†	11–42	26.2%†	10–17	58.8%†	41.6%†	43.4%†	17.9%†	5	10:55 −1:17	27.3%	1.4 −1.8
Jacob Hammond	22	6:41	13.0%	48	23	5	2	3	12	12	16–27	59.3%†	1–16	6.3%†	13–18	72.2%†	40.7%†	47.1%†	41.9%†	4	4:19 −2:22	8.6%	1.3 −0.9
Peyton Seals	17	8:13	12.4%	31	20	4	4	0	7	17	5–7	71.4%†	6–21	28.6%†	3–3	100.0%†	50.0%†	52.9%†	10.7%†	5	17:57 +9:44	44.9%	5.2 +3.4
Jake Sussberg	18	6:11	9.8%	34	14	2	1	1	2	14	3–6	50.0%†	7–21	33.3%†	7–10	70.0%†	50.0%†	54.1%†	37.0%†	3	4:03 −2:08	6.1%	2.0 +0.1
Cash McSweeneyUnder 100 minutes	13	4:53	5.6%	8	13	8	2	0	9	9	2–5	40.0%†	1–5	20.0%†	1–4	25.0%†	35.0%†	34.0%†	40.0%†	2	2:29 −2:24	2.5%	0.0 −0.6
Zio KimFew gamesUnder 100 minutes	7	0:36	0.4%	2	1	1	0	0	1	0	0–0	—	0–0	—	2–2	100.0%†	—	113.6%†	—	1	0:44 +0:08	0.4%	0.0 −0.3
Ryan MandesFew gamesUnder 100 minutes	7	0:29	0.3%	2	1	0	0	0	0	1	1–1	100.0%†	0–0	—	0–1	0.0%†	100.0%†	69.4%†	100.0%†	1	0:44 +0:15	0.4%	0.0 −0.3
William KutzlerFew gamesUnder 100 minutes	4	0:36	0.2%	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0–0	—	0–0	—	0–0	—	—	—	—	1	0:02 −0:34	0.0%	0.0 0.0
Lucas DenaultFew gamesUnder 100 minutes	1	0:14	0.0%	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0–0	—	0–0	—	0–0	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Cooper MuellerFew gamesUnder 100 minutes	1	0:11	0.0%	3	0	0	0	0	0	0	0–0	—	1–1	100.0%†	0–0	—	150.0%†	150.0%†	0.0%†	—	—	—	—
Team, games with logs · season totals	28 games			1889	914	349	not published	60	311	not published	407–838	48.6%	228–672	33.9%	391–523	74.8%	49.6%	54.3%	34.6%
Sum of players				1889	835	349	130	59	294	467	Shooting residuals: see Player Lines Against Team Totals.
Residual: team minus players				0	+79	0	not published	+1	+17	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: $0 (assumed opted out); 80% Range $0 to $0 (assumed)
Tier: Low and other; low evidence

Assumed from one unverified press article that names schools that did not opt in. Methodology

No player figures. The Team Pool is $0.

1 rostered player has no figure: no recorded possessions or no matched player record.

What-If Calculator · Speculativeβ

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

No modelled Team Pool (opted out). Enter a pool of your own.

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, Princeton University (NCAA Division I-FCS)
Measure	School-Reported Amount	Note
Men's basketball revenue	$2,445,350	Equals expenses (budget identity)
Men's basketball expenses	$2,445,350
Athletics department expenses	$50,386,480
Athletics department revenue	$50,386,480

Team Totalsβ

Season totals, 28 games, 1,821 possessions. Observed box-score sums, unadjusted. Definitions

Team and opponent season totals
Statistic	Team	Opponents
Points	1,889	2,028
Field goals made	635	718
Field goals attempted	1,510	1,576
3-pointers made	228	203
3-pointers attempted	672	652
Free throws made	391	389
Free throws attempted	523	536
Offensive rebounds	256	262
Defensive rebounds	658	684
Total rebounds	914	946
Assists	349	360
Blocks	60	89
Turnovers	311	260
Steals	No team figure. Players sum to 130.
Personal fouls	No team figure. Players sum to 467.
Minutes (derived)	5,650	not published

28 of 28 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	1,889	1,889	0	±9.4	0
Field goals made	Reconciled	635	635	0	±3.2	0
Field goals attempted	Reconciled	1,510	1,510	0	±7.5	0
3-pointers made	Reconciled	228	228	0	±2.0	0
3-pointers attempted	Reconciled	672	672	0	±3.4	0
Free throws made	Reconciled	391	391	0	±2.0	0
Free throws attempted	Reconciled	523	523	0	±2.6	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	914	835	+79	±73.1	0
Assists	Reconciled	349	349	0	±2.0	0
Blocks	Reconciled	60	59	+1	±2.0	0
Turnovers	Residual shown	311	294	+17	±9.3	0
Steals	No team figure	not published	130	not published	not published	not published
Personal fouls	No team figure	not published	467	not published	not published	not published
Minutes (derived)	Reconciled	5,650	5,639	+11.4	±113.0	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
Jackson Hicke	85.0%	+0.4range -0.4 to +1.6Sufficient evidence
Landon Clark	72.0%	-0.1range -1.2 to +1.3Sufficient evidence
Malik Abdullahi	65.9%	-1.1range -1.9 to -0.0Sufficient evidence
Jack Stanton	62.4%	+1.4range -0.0 to +2.4Sufficient evidence
Jacob Huggins	52.5%	+0.8range -0.3 to +1.8Sufficient evidence
Dalen Davis	49.2%	-1.3range -2.7 to +0.5Sufficient evidence
CJ Happy	40.4%	-1.6range -2.7 to -0.2Sufficient evidence
Sebastian Whitfield	30.3%	-1.9range -3.2 to -0.6Sufficient evidence
Jacob Hammond	13.4%	-2.4range -3.2 to -1.6Limited evidence
Peyton Seals	12.3%	+0.0range -0.9 to +0.9Limited evidence
Jake Sussberg	9.9%	-0.7range -1.9 to +0.3Limited evidence
Cash McSweeney	5.7%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence
Zio Kim	0.4%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence
Ryan Mandes	0.3%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence
William Kutzler	0.2%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence
Lucas Denault	0.0%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence
Cooper Mueller	0.0%	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: +9.1range +8.2 to +10.1Sufficient evidence

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

11 valued players hold 98.7% of on-court time. 5 without a value (under 300 possessions) hold 1.3%, counted at replacement level -9.5. Limited-evidence players hold 7.1%.

NIL Methodology · Scheduling and Model-Implied Value