VMI

SC · 2025–26 · Raw net rank 358 · Raw net -21.7 · Tempo 67.6 · 29 Division I games · Through 2026-03-06

Record: 3–26; 3 wins
AdjNet: -21.2β; rank 359 of 365
AdjO: 99.7β; rank 335 of 365
AdjD: 120.9β; rank 362 of 365
AdjT: 67.8β
SOS: -3.3β; rank 274 of 363
NCSOS: -0.5β
WAB: -20.8β; rank 360 of 363
RR: -1.3β
Exp. W: 4.3β

Scouting Report

Scouting report with national ranks
Category	Offense	Defense	D-I Average
Efficiency
Efficiency / 100 poss.	101.4311	123.1362	108.5
Four Factors
Effective FG%	47.6325	57.0357	51.4
TO / 100 poss.	15.388	15.7242	16.7
Offensive rebound %	25.6329	37.2360	30.6
FTA / FGA %	30.6294	34.6164	35.0
Shooting
3P%	31.5306	36.5326	33.9
2P%	47.9312	58.9359	51.7
FT%	72.2202	73.0218	72.5
Style
3PA / FGA %	53.6	46.5	39.5
Assists / FGM %	50.7	62.3	52.6
Blocks / opp. 2PA %	6.4	10.5	9.5
Point Distribution
3-pointers %	43.2	36.6	31.4
2-pointers %	38.0	45.3	48.8
Free throws %	18.8	18.2	19.8

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

Rotation Depth

Effective Rotation Size: 8.0
Top Three Share of Minutes: 47%
Bench Share of Minutes: 28%
Players with Logged Minutes: 13

Bench: players outside the top five in minutes. Definitions

Schedule and Results

Schedule and results
Date	Opponent	Result	Poss.	Site	Record
11-07	Southern Ind.	W 78–74	78.3	Away	1–0
11-09	Missouri	L 68–106	75.6	Away	1–1
11-15	Jacksonville	L 67–69	66.5	Home	1–2
11-19	Richmond	L 54–87	66.1	Away	1–3
11-22	Stetson	L 80–99	66.2	Away	1–4
11-24	Buffalo	L 70–78	66.5	Neutral	1–5
11-26	Bowling Green	L 48–81	66.7	Neutral	1–6
11-29	UCF	L 57–82	68.0	Away	1–7
12-09	Loyola Maryland	W 86–70	62.8	Home	2–7
12-21	Radford	L 90–97	73.2	Away	2–8
01-01	Samford	L 58–78	67.3	Home	2–9
01-03	Chattanooga	W 79–71	69.6	Home	3–9
01-07	ETSU	L 67–81	66.4	Away	3–10
01-10	Furman	L 48–69	65.9	Away	3–11
01-15	Mercer	L 67–77	66.2	Home	3–12
01-17	The Citadel	L 68–82	67.8	Home	3–13
01-21	UNC Greensboro	L 78–85	66.1	Home	3–14
01-24	Western Caro.	L 58–88	58.1	Away	3–15
01-29	The Citadel	L 56–80	62.9	Away	3–16
01-31	Mercer	L 81–95	72.7	Away	3–17
02-04	Wofford	L 67–81	67.7	Home	3–18
02-07	ETSU	L 70–87	70.6	Home	3–19
02-11	UNC Greensboro	L 71–92	69.2	Away	3–20
02-14	Furman	L 72–90	71.0	Home	3–21
02-18	Wofford	L 76–82	68.9	Away	3–22
02-21	Western Caro.	L 62–81	63.2	Home	3–23
02-26	Samford	L 61–80	65.6	Away	3–24
02-28	Chattanooga	L 79–86	63.4	Away	3–25
03-06	UNC Greensboro	L 70–84	67.4	Neutral	3–26

Roster · 13 players

Player logs in 29 of 29 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
TJ Johnson	29	36:26	91.1%	18.1	7.0	1.3	1.4	0.2	1.7	1.7	55–109	50.5%	101–291	34.7%	112–137	81.8%	51.6%	57.0%	34.3%	5	38:58 +2:31	97.4%	15.8 −2.3
Tan Yildizoglu	29	31:42	79.2%	10.4	3.6	4.4	1.4	0.0	2.4	2.4	79–166	47.6%	31–113	27.4%	50–79	63.3%	45.0%	48.0%	28.3%	5	37:08 +5:26	92.8%	14.6 +4.2
Mario Tatum, Jr.	29	26:05	65.2%	8.1	2.0	1.4	0.6	0.1	0.6	1.8	60–127	47.2%	22–90	24.4%	49–75	65.3%	42.9%	47.0%	34.6%	5	22:02 −4:03	55.1%	4.4 −3.7
Linus Holmstrom	28	26:53	64.9%	10.9	2.2	1.3	0.9	0.1	1.5	3.1	35–67	52.2%	68–177	38.4%	32–42	76.2%	56.1%	58.3%	17.2%	5	29:32 +2:39	73.8%	12.8 +1.9
Cal Liston	29	22:19	55.8%	4.7	2.8	0.9	0.4	0.2	0.8	2.6	14–28	50.0%	32–98	32.7%	12–18	66.7%†	49.2%	50.8%	14.3%	5	30:21 +8:02	75.9%	8.4 +3.7
AJ Clark	20	26:57	46.5%	6.6	5.3	1.4	1.3	0.7	1.1	2.4	42–85	49.4%	8–25	32.0%†	24–35	68.6%	49.1%	52.6%	31.8%	—	—	—	—
Kaden Stuckey	26	18:39	41.8%	4.4	4.7	0.5	0.4	0.8	1.0	2.6	39–96	40.6%	0–13	0.0%†	37–60	61.7%	35.8%	42.5%	55.0%	5	26:45 +8:07	66.9%	8.2 +3.8
Walker Andrews	26	11:31	25.8%	3.9	0.7	0.4	0.3	0.0	0.2	0.6	15–32	46.9%†	17–66	25.8%	21–26	80.8%	41.3%†	46.6%†	26.5%†	5	14:38 +3:07	36.6%	4.8 +0.9
Jaylen Pazon	17	11:09	16.3%	5.2	1.2	0.3	0.3	0.2	1.2	1.4	31–62	50.0%†	3–21	14.3%†	17–22	77.3%†	42.8%†	47.5%†	26.5%†	—	—	—	—
Alexander DaushviliFew gamesUnder 100 minutes	5	17:02	7.3%	6.8	4.2	1.0	0.4	0.2	0.6	1.8	7–10	70.0%†	0–7	0.0%†	20–24	83.3%†	41.2%†	61.7%†	141.2%†	—	—	—	—
Mason HagedornFew gamesUnder 100 minutes	6	6:58	3.6%	1.5	0.7	0.2	0.0	0.2	0.2	0.7	0–5	0.0%†	3–6	50.0%†	0–0	—	40.9%†	40.9%†	0.0%†	—	—	—	—
Mason LawsonFew gamesUnder 100 minutes	4	1:04	0.4%	0.8	0.0	0.0	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.3	0–0	—	1–1	100.0%†	0–0	—	150.0%†	150.0%†	0.0%†	1	0:32 −0:32	0.3%	3.0 +2.3
Branford Edmonds IIIFew gamesUnder 100 minutes	2	1:24	0.2%	0.0	0.5	0.0	0.5	0.0	0.0	0.0	0–0	—	0–0	—	0–0	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
Team, games with logs · per game	29 games			68.5	30.9	11.6	not published	2.0	10.3	not published	377–787	47.9%	286–908	31.5%	374–518	72.2%	47.6%	51.6%	30.6%
Sum of players				68.5	27.5	11.6	6.6	2.0	9.6	17.3	Shooting residuals: see Player Lines Against Team Totals.
Residual: team minus players				0.0	+3.4	0.0	not published	0.0	+0.7	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: $210K; 80% Range $78K to $575K
Tier: Low and other; low evidence
Team Pool, Scenarios Z1 to Z4: $195K to $235K; Scenario medians
Players with Figures: 13; 4 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
TJ Johnson	91.2%	$21K	$1K to $88K	16.9%	$19K to $23K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Tan Yildizoglu	78.7%	$12K	$1K to $59K	9.5%	$11K to $13K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Linus Holmstrom	65.3%	$25K	$2K to $110K	13.9%	$23K to $27K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Mario Tatum, Jr.	64.9%	$17K	$1K to $75K	12.5%	$16K to $19K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Cal Liston	55.9%	$8K	$1K to $37K	5.0%	$7K to $9K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
AJ Clark	49.0%	$17K	$1K to $78K	10.3%	$16K to $19K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Kaden Stuckey	41.0%	$9K	$1K to $37K	6.3%	$8K to $9K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Walker Andrews	24.7%	$17K	$3K to $155K	7.0%	$16K to $19K	$2K	Sufficient evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Jaylen Pazon	16.4%	$5K	$1K to $18K	3.3%	$4K to $5K	$2K	Limited evidenceRange driven by assumption, not data
Alexander Daushvili	8.4%	$2K	$1K to $5K	0.8%	$1K to $2K	$2K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data
Mason Hagedorn	4.0%	$2K	$1K to $5K	0.8%	$1K to $2K	$2K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data
Mason Lawson	0.4%	$2K	$1K to $5K	0.8%	$1K to $2K	$2K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data
Branford Edmonds III	0.3%	$2K	$1K to $5K	0.8%	$1K to $2K	$2K	Floor only: below 300 possessions, no value estimateRange driven by assumption, not data
Team Pool	—	$210K	$78K to $575K	100%	$195K to $235K	—

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, Virginia Military Institute (NCAA Division I-FCS)
Measure	School-Reported Amount	Note
Men's basketball revenue	$2,241,416	Equals expenses (budget identity)
Men's basketball expenses	$2,241,416
Athletics department expenses	$20,033,879
Athletics department revenue	$20,033,879

Team Totalsβ

Season per game, 29 games, 1,960 possessions. Observed box-score sums, unadjusted. Definitions

Team and opponent season totals
Statistic	Team	Opponents
Points	68.5	83.2
Field goals made	22.9	29.0
Field goals attempted	58.4	59.8
3-pointers made	9.9	10.1
3-pointers attempted	31.3	27.8
Free throws made	12.9	15.1
Free throws attempted	17.9	20.7
Offensive rebounds	9.7	12.6
Defensive rebounds	21.2	28.2
Total rebounds	30.9	40.8
Assists	11.6	18.0
Blocks	2.0	2.9
Turnovers	10.3	10.6
Steals	No team figure. Players sum to 192.
Personal fouls	No team figure. Players sum to 501.
Minutes (derived)	200.0	not published

29 of 29 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	1,986	1,986	0	±9.9	0
Field goals made	Reconciled	663	663	0	±3.3	0
Field goals attempted	Reconciled	1,695	1,695	0	±8.5	0
3-pointers made	Reconciled	286	286	0	±2.0	0
3-pointers attempted	Reconciled	908	908	0	±4.5	0
Free throws made	Reconciled	374	374	0	±2.0	0
Free throws attempted	Reconciled	518	518	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	897	798	+99	±71.8	0
Assists	Reconciled	336	336	0	±2.0	0
Blocks	Reconciled	59	59	0	±2.0	0
Turnovers	Residual shown	300	279	+21	±9.0	0
Steals	No team figure	not published	192	not published	not published	not published
Personal fouls	No team figure	not published	501	not published	not published	not published
Minutes (derived)	Reconciled	5,800	5,779	+20.8	±116.0	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
TJ Johnson	91.2%	-2.7range -3.4 to -1.5Sufficient evidence
Tan Yildizoglu	78.7%	-3.9range -5.0 to -2.5Sufficient evidence
Linus Holmstrom	65.3%	-1.7range -2.7 to -0.7Sufficient evidence
Mario Tatum, Jr.	64.9%	-2.5range -3.4 to -1.1Sufficient evidence
Cal Liston	55.9%	-4.6range -5.9 to -3.4Sufficient evidence
AJ Clark	49.0%	-1.8range -2.7 to -1.0Sufficient evidence
Kaden Stuckey	41.0%	-3.2range -4.4 to -2.0Sufficient evidence
Walker Andrews	24.7%	-1.0range -2.1 to +0.1Sufficient evidence
Jaylen Pazon	16.4%	-2.9range -3.9 to -1.9Limited evidence
Alexander Daushvili	8.4%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence
Mason Hagedorn	4.0%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence
Mason Lawson	0.4%	Fewer than 300 on-court possessions; no value is estimated. Insufficient evidence
Branford Edmonds III	0.3%	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: +6.5range +5.7 to +7.4Sufficient evidence

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

9 valued players hold 97.4% of on-court time. 4 without a value (under 300 possessions) hold 2.6%, counted at replacement level -9.5. Limited-evidence players hold 3.3%.

NIL Methodology · Scheduling and Model-Implied Value

VMI